MSN's Three Events to Watch: What a Load of Crap!

So, according to msn, the three events "you should follow" in the upcoming Winter Olympics are Ice Hockey (Field Hockey being difficult when it's 10 degrees outside), Bobsledding, and Freestyle Aerial Skiing.

Before getting into the events one should REALLY be watching and why, I'll cover msn's supposedly valid reasons to follow these three specifically.

Bobsledding: With reigning World Champion Steven Holcomb coming back from an eye surgery that saved him from going all but completely blind, and Vonetta Williams attempting to repeat as the still only African American to ever win a Winter Olympic Gold medal, the sport has two inspiring stories.

Aerial Skiing: American Jeret "Speedy" Peterson attempts to find redemption for his disappointing seventh place finish at Turin.

Ice Hockey: It's Hockey. A large, worldwide, very competitive sport whose American roster could very well feature not a single returning Olympian, and has not had a repeat Olympic finalist since the NHL players started playing in 1998.

Now, I agree with Ice Hockey, and yes, the bobsledding story is moving, but Peterson is a jerk. After failing to land his signature move "the hurricane" back in Turin, he was asked to leave the games early, following a bar fight. And this is what he says about attempting his very difficult trick on his last try, when he had yet to land it in the competition: "Could you imagine if I had decided to step down to an easier trick, and I was only giving it 90 percent and I ended up in second? I couldn't live with that. I would definitely have to know that when I'm done, medal around my neck or not, that I gave everything I had. If everything clicks, I'd just beat everyone by a mile, and that's what I'm looking for."

What an arrogant prick! He lost four years ago, and then was asked to exit quietly to avoid embarrassment, and he still has the gall to say shit like that!

Here are my three picks for the three big events to watch, and my reason will be obvious: Ice Hockey, Freestyle Snowboarding, and Figure Skating (yes, Figure Skating). Here's why: these are the three winter events that gain the most attention outside of a connection to the Olympics. This causes a larger audience, more attendance at the live events, more competitors in the sports, and more pressure on the competitors themselves knowing how many people are watching them potentially fail, and how many other people could have potentially been there instead of them.

While Bobsledding and Speedskating and even Curling get a mention during Olympic seasons, in off-years, no one pays attention (unless you watch a lot of VS, and even they're not desperate enough to broadcast Curling on a regular basis).

So, suck it msn, screw "Speedy" Peterson, and go Shaun White!

10 Years of Stuff #8: Comedy Central's Political Satire

The Daily Show started in the mid 90s. The show's original host was a guy named Craig Kilborn who left the show to become host of CBS's The Late Late Show. How'd that work for you, Craig? Oh, right, you were replaced by the Scottish guy from The Drew Carey Show.

The Daily Show's new host starting in 1999 was John Stewart, but I'm still counting his rise to comedic brilliance as part of this decade because it took the decline of genuine, modern journalism for Stewart to truly find his show's niche as the one place where you're guaranteed to find out the various hypocrisies and contradictions at heart in our modern political system.

Stewart was voted "America's most trusted anchor" in a recent poll. He called it the result of "the fuck you vote," but there is good reason behind this. On no other show are you likely to find two people with differing opinions having a genuine debate and discussion about the issues, without all the screaming, ranting, and certainty of one's absolute rightness despite any and all facts to the contrary that seem to have conquered our so-called "legitimate" media. Even time constraints don't stop Stewart, on The Daily Show's website, you can find interviews/ debates that last as long as twenty minutes without a single break.

And they're still funny! That's part of what makes it all so great, the show's sincere search for truth in the media and politics is brilliantly balanced out by their mockery of anyone and everyone involved, making the show a one of a kind combination of joke and genuine news.

And then there's Stephen Colbert's The Colbert Report, bringing to life the maxim that the best way to do a satire is to take yourself completely seriously. Lampooning the modern media blowhards who get such high ratings by presenting their own opinions as fact; Stephen agrees with them, acts like them, and insults them all in one half-hour of over-the-top hilariousness. Hell, he's become such a celebrity himself, he's gotten the American people to help fund the US Speedskating team.

Is it sad that the best source for real, in-depth talks about modern politics is on Comedy Central? Maybe, but you can't sell a news show to most people now without some entertainment thrown in, so as along as The Daily Show and The Colbert Report keep up their high ratings, we'll keep getting at the contradictions and stupidity behind the people we trust to run our country.

10 Years of Stuff #7: Hi-Def Television

Who could have foreseen ten years ago, that we would be getting an image at home that often looks better than reality itself?

Full 1080 Hi-Def makes everything that much more awesome! The added depth of image and sharper colors make a beautiful woman's curves look (without getting too pervy) almost unbearably sexy. The superior sound quality makes concert footage sound as clear as ringing a bell beside one's own ear. And oh, Lord, sports are just amazing!

Before I'd even seen tennis in Hi-Def I was already hearing how a tennis court had never looked that big on TV. Now, having seen it for myself, I don't know how I could ever go back. You can actually see the depth and curve of shots in tennis; a soccer pitch looks simply massive, making the effective long balls seem impossible; and I distinctly remember when my sister and I were first blown away that we could make out the faces of the crowd behind home plate. We have reached the point where one might easily be getting a better view in one's home than if one were actually at the game.

As for films, everyone usually remarks how great modern films shot in digital look, (like Dark Knight or Wall-E) and they do look amazing, but its older films that have had the biggest impression on me. One of the first films I saw in HD was Dr. Strangelove, and I recall ignoring the story and the characters because I was staring slack-jawed at the depth of the hallway they were talking in. It looked so big! And you have not seen the car chase scene in Bullit until you've seen those car's-eye-view shots in lovely 1080. It even made me a little light-headed the first time, and that's just AWESOME!

They say the next innovation will be fully immersive 3-d in our homes, a la James Cameron's Avatar. Hopefully, by that point they'll have worked out a way for me to see 3-d, because if there's something I really can't wait to see in 3-d it's... well, you can guess.

10 Years of Stuff #6: A Shift in Gaming Culture

Two years ago, X-Play (the most successful show focused on video games in the U.S.) did a whole story about the rumored decline of P.C. gaming. They made the comment, which I already agreed with, that P.C. gaming wasn't "dead, it was different."

The difference is the massive, world-wide spread of casual, online gaming. The spread of computers (which keep getting better and faster) for business and personal use, combined with mobile phones that also keep increasing their speed and capabilities, have brought about the rise of flash games, which have turned the whole concept of "gaming" into something we all do when we should be working.

Even my sister, who's less of a techie than I am (you'll notice I still don't have any pictures on this blog), regularly plays a daily jigsaw puzzle online, got really into the flash game Flowerz (because she saw me playing it), and is now into some game where she shoots things with big eyes to make matching groups of three. Hell, she's even mentioned that she's considered getting a Wii, Nintendo's successful gaming system that clearly aims for the rising casual gamer market as well as the traditional gamer.

Many so-called traditional, hardcore gamers have had an issue with this spreading out of their world. As if its no longer cool if everyone else is doing it too. I, however, applaud the rising appeal of games. Flash games are quick, easy, cheap (often free) distractions one can just pick up, play briefly, and then put away and forget about while focusing on other things. They bring all the fun of other, longer games without requiring all the cost and time commitment. They offer enjoyable escapism minus cost or a huge devotion of one's free time.

The modern gaming world gives those of us who are broke, cheap, or just lack the inclination to spend money on gaming the opportunity to have just as much fun as you lucky bastards who have the money and time to spend blowing the hell out of everyone in Borderlands.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

10 Years of Stuff #5: The Cubs Still Didn't Win a World Series

WOW. Over a hundred years and still no World Series Championship.

That's so sad, it's funny.

Or it's so funny, it's sad, depends on whose side you're on.

BUT, the Chicago Cubs still have a larger and much more devoted fanbase than the Chicago White Sox.

WTF??!!

(PS, Thank you Milton Bradley.)

10 Years of Stuff #4: Kick Ass Cleaning Products

I used to think having hardwood floors would be such a pain. Sweeping wouldn't seem to get all the dust and dirt, so you'd have to stain the floors, and that would require moving furniture and blah, blah, etc., etc. Then, I discovered the Swiffer.

I'm pretty sure the Swiffer was actually invented in the last decade, but it was in this most recent decade when they spread the Swiffer empire out to dusters (since we were all already using the Swiffer cloths as dust cloths), the Wet Jet (if you really can see the dirt getting pushed around, it's been too damn long since you cleaned your floors!), and even the Swiffer Vac (now they're just messing with us).

Beyond the cleaning world of Swiffer, I've also found the various erasers to be incredibly effective (the Arm and Hammer ones are often most expensive and also the best), you just wet the things and you can scrape the dirt and stains off without having to really scrape or put up much physical effort at all. Oh, and now you can buy these Lysol or Clorox wipes that wreak of cleaning fluid, but, when you want a quick, easy clean-up of your kitchen or bathroom you cannot get better than these things.

In all, cleaning products have advanced much in this past decade by appealing to both the public's desire for cleanliness and our pathological laziness, as everything becomes more "germ-fighting" and "dirt destroying" while also becoming easier to use and "guaranteed fast-acting." Though I will always be baffled as to why lemon is the go-to scent for anything clean.

Charlie Brown's Christmas Conundrum

Ah, the off-key singing of a chorus of children; the voice-over that doesn't always exactly match the animation; the tiny piano, stand-up bass, and guitar (that Snoopy hardly even plays) that's somehow meant to stand in for Vince Guaraldi's entire orchestra; it must be The Charlie Brown Christmas Special, the yearly show whose aim is to attack the commercialism of the season and put the "Christ" back in "Christmas".

There is an obvious flaw, however, with the special's aim: it has, itself, become a major part of the commercialism of the Christmas season. Indeed, on the Christmas tree currently in my eye line, there are Linus and Lucy ornaments depicting the characters as they appear in the special's musical finale, and that is merely the tip of the massive iceberg that is the Charlie Brown empire, which continues to get a yearly boost from the Christmas Special, which, again, argues against just such a commercial focus on Christmas.

However, I still buy the Special itself as sincere. Linus's slightly lisped, spotlighted (who's running the spotlight?), bible verse speech manages to still be (at least, somewhat) moving decades after it first aired, I still like it when Charlie Brown's sincere, puny little tree is made stronger by the power of love and togetherness (maybe that's what's happening anyway) and I always feel a little charge when Charlie Brown returns to find his friends together and the tree's now beautiful and he gets to have one good, happy moment at last.

But, all warm and fuzzy feelings aside, one can't escape the fact that the Special is attempting to bring religion to the forefront of Christmas celebrating, while we all ignore that and just focus on toys and gifts and decorating and cooking and sales and wrapping and television and movies and everything else, some of which is being sold as connected to the Charlie Brown Christmas Special.

So, while I can't fault the Charlie Brown Special for what's been down with it and to it, it is always interesting to point out our inherent hypocrisy and greed.

10 Years of Stuff #3: Music.... No, Really

While this decade has had the expected amount of financially successful, mass-produced bland (often blond) popstars, and while Karaoke Idol continues to be a perennial television hit, the last ten years have nonetheless managed to produce some genuinely great and original music.

The Strokes began 2001 leading the way for a "rebirth of rock," with their hard, guitar-heavy short songs that were a clear throwback to the rock hits of previous decades. Though both The Strokes and most of these bands eventually went the way of their predecessors, bands like Kings of Leon, Silversun Pickups, and Kaiser Chiefs continue to bring forth the blunt, unapologetic hard rock sound and kick ass doing it.

Meanwhile, the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, having outlasted The Strokes, are still pulling off their original, "we can get away with anything" sound that has somehow gotten their most recent hit, "Heads Will Roll," wide stream fame, and they're not the only ones who have turned originality into success in this decade.

The Killers came out with a sound so unique, critics tried coming up with new names for it (none of which stuck); Panic! At the Disco's album Fever to Tell specifically defied nearly every convention modern rock has given us (verse-chorus-bridge, who needs it?); and Vampire Weekend decided what modern rock needed was more reggae and island sounds.

The Rap/ Hip-Hop world has also provided us with new sounds to mingle in with the old. Kanye West (yes, I'm praising Kanye West) and Akon brought the robotic auto-tune to the mainstream, which then quickly suffered from overuse. But, smaller acts like Chromeo keep it fresh and original while the slow rhymes of Kid Cudi give us someone to point at and say, "See, there's still new things to do in rap!" And then there's the raw voice of Lil Wayne that takes us back to a more simple, but still awesome rap style ("Prom Queen" is a great song!).

Standing atop the music scene in the past ten years (and deserving to be there) is Beyonce. She exists as the perfect bridge between the rap/hip-hop world and that of mainstream pop music, with a success that transcends both. She has the large, dance/ performance heavy shows to equal Britney Spears, but the fact that she can (and does) sing amazingly well raises her to another level entirely. She has somehow managed to do what almost no one else has (including J.T.), stretch out from her singer background to conquer other fields, but still be successful as a singer.

Basically, she's everything J. Lo. and Britney wish they were.

10 Years of Stuff #2: We Can Say Whatever the Frack We Want!

Remember when "blog" still needed to be explained as an abbreviation for "web-log"? Remember when "tweet" was just the sound a bird made? Remember when Webster's Dictionary added Stephen Colbert's original catchword, "truthiness"?

As we progress into new and undiscovered technologies, the addition of new words to the English language has become a necessity. However, we've gone well beyond just words we needed to add, and started throwing whatever we felt like into the English language like it's a stew cooked by madmen, comprised of any old crap we find laying around.

Now, I was an English major and I have a Master's in English, so one would assume that I might have a problem with this free form approach to language, but I actually really enjoy the freedom it provides. I mean, "preggers" has now become a commonly used synonym for "pregnant" (I don't know why, it takes just as long to say and sounds ridiculous, but whatever), because gossip columnists started saying it and printing it in tabloids.

And remember that the English language isn't viewed like other languages. We're not the French, we don't have an English Academy locked away in some stuffy classroom voting on what should or should not be spoken by truly literate, pretentious people. Granted, we do have the aforementioned Webster's Dictionary, but Webster's includes slang and is constantly updating in order to keep up with commonly used words and phrases.

So the closest thing we have to a definitive guide on the English language adapts with us instead of forcing us to adhere to its rules and guidelines. The means that the people cited as being supposedly in charge of our language aren't really in charge, WE ARE!! We're literally making this shit up as we go along!

Hell, even grammar rules are changing from what I was taught. You know you can now correctly begin a sentence with "and" or "but"? One might be tempted to ask "Why?", but the answer is "Why the hell not? People were already doing it anyway, might as well go with the flow."

Ah, to be alive in a time when, if I get stuck writing because the word I want doesn't exist, I can do just as Billy Shakespeare himself did, and make the frackin' thing up.

(P.S.- "Frack" is what they used instead of "fuck" on Battlestar Galactica. Yes I'm a geek, but I admit it.)

10 Years of Stuff: The Roger and Rafa Rivalry

So, we're about to come to the end of the decade without a name (the double aughts? the 00's? whatever), and everyone is making lists of the songs and bands and films and television and websites and everything else in the last ten years that have meant something to them for whatever reason. Well, I have joined the throng and am now making a list of ten things about the last decade that I have decided (on the spur of the moment and with little forethought) has struck me as interesting, cool, memorable, important, or just needed to get out there. Don't take anything too seriously with this list (as you shouldn't of any such list), and remember that this is just my babbling and there's no guarantee that I'll even come up with ten things.

To start then, modern tennis's greatest rivalry. Great rivalries always make a game more interesting. America's girl-next-door tennis champion Chris Evert had her polar opposite in lesbian, Russian Martina Navratilova; the reserved, big forehand, big server Pete Sampras had the mulletted rebel and brilliant returner Andre Agassi; and Roger Federer has Rafael Nadal.

At first, Federer's greatest enemy was himself. Suffering under the weight of heavy expectation, the Swiss finally had what was assumed to be his big breakthrough when he defeated "Pistol" Pete Sampras in what would be Sampras' final US Open match. Even then, however, Roger found he couldn't live up to his new assumed position as tennis's future great until he won his first Grand Slam title at Wimbledon.

The "Fed Express" really started the next season, when Federer began the dominance that would last four years, capturing eleven more Slam titles and holding onto the World Number One rank for a record setting 237 consecutive weeks. However, it takes a great challenge to make a champion greater, and without one, Federer started to look somewhat complacent.

He would appear bored in his early round matches, he never seemed to get too pumped up or excited about any of his staggering accomplishments, and I even recall his girlfriend Mirka being caught on live television confirming a reservation very soon after Roger had defeated Andy Roddick for one of his US Open titles.

Federer's brilliant, beautiful game became stagnant. He had stopped serving and volleying or doing anything too aggressive in his play. He didn't like to use his unbelievable dropshot as he felt it messed with the rhythm of play, and he mostly just stayed back, ran his opponents around, and might sometimes finish them off with a backhand or forehand angle that would make even Andre Agassi stare in disbelief.

Then he encountered the King of Clay. Rafael Nadal came out of nowhere to capture a French Open title in his first ever attempt! The speed of Nadal's progression from natural clay courter to great all around player shocked the entire world; except for Nadal himself who had always dreamed of winning Wimbledon despite the lack of success most clay courters had had on England's grass since Bjorn Borg.

When Nadal actually managed to beat Federer on tennis's greatest stage (and Federer's best surface), it sparked discussions on not only the end of King Roger's reign, but the start of Nadal's.

And what more perfect rival for Federer could there be than Nadal? The stoic Swiss maestro who never likes opponents to see him sweat and the energetic Spanish bull who seems to run forever. Federer, who used to love wearing opponents down, shocking them with beautiful play, now had to face someone who had no fear of him, ran down every point like his life depended on it, and added so much backspin his shots seemed to defy the laws of physics.

But just when Federer seemed over and done, he changed his game. Though he had been as loath to morph into a more aggressive player as Ted Williams had been to change his swing when teams started "the Ted Williams shift" (they would all go closer to right field, where Ted preferred to hit it, and he kept hitting it to right field), Roger was now the aggressor, trying to match Nadal's exhausting defense with offensive shots that couldn't be returned.

And his fire returned. We all started to see almost as much celebrating and reactions from Roger's side of the net as we usually did from Rafa's. He was driven to better his game, and the rest of the field followed. Newbies like Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic, Juan Martin del Potro, and even the former world number one Andy Roddick have made the effort to match Nadal and Federer's drive to greatness with their own.

Granted, Federer once again seems to have focus issues having finished his career slam with a French Open victory and finally beating out Sampras for most singles Slam titles ever for a man (Steffi Graf has 21, only six more to go, Roger); and now Nadal's physical and possibly mental health have become recurring stories in men's tennis. But, I have hope that these two will both recover and continue to push themselves (and thus the rest of the field), to consistent high levels of play.

DWTS Finale: Well... Dammit

Just because you see something disappointing coming, doesn't make it any less of a let down when it does. I could tell coming into tonight's Results show that Donny's fans were more than likely going to beat out Mya, the by FAR best dancer of the season.

Also, sadly, there was some negative reactions from some voters to Mya, especially towards the end. This seemed to stem from her having the most dancing experience coming into the competition; some didn't think she connected enough with the audience or even her partner; and some even claimed she had a superior attitude and called her a bitch, which is just not true at all! If anything, I think these final two reasons were just invented so people could validate their own negative feelings for someone who had never done anything wrong other than be better than anyone else.

The judges and the show tried to make it look fair by giving Donny the final victory and thus tying him in points with Mya. This then left the show's winner purely in the hands of the voters, and made Mya and Donny look even, which they really aren't. So, I will call a slight "Shenanigans" on the show for setting it up that much, but really, they knew Donny would win either way, they just needed to make it look better than it actually is. On that note, lucky thing Dmitry didn't do a better job of the freestyle performance, then Mya would have been the by far highest scoring contestant, but probably still lose.

I will give a resounding "BOOOOOOOO" to the fans in the studio. Their "support" for Donny and Kelly was offensive when compared to the relative silence Maya received. She put just as much into this competition as they did people, and she deserves at least some of the support you didn't give her when voting!

ABC also deserves a "BOOOOOOO" because the show was preempted until after football in some places in the west, but they didn't keep the voting open later to accommodate this. And they never mentioned this on tonight's show. Thanks ABC, nice way of pretending like nothing's wrong when you really screwed up.

To be fair, Donny did do a very good job with his final dance, but the Argentine tango is so much easier for the man. All you need to focus on is good posture and keeping a straight face while a beautiful woman leaps into your arms and wraps her legs around you.

So... Donny won. The consummate performer and beloved entertainer won over even more fans and proved, again, that popularity trumps talent. I am both let down and strangely numb to this outcome, since I saw it coming, but still hoped Mya would pull it off. That just goes to show where hope gets you.

Final Thought: Whitney Houston's beautiful voice is GONE! Her tone was way too low, she was short of breath, her range has largely left her, and at points she lost the beat and seemed to speak more than sing. While I admit that it would be all but impossible for someone to keep the incredible operatic range she had when she started twenty years ago, I think we all know what added to her vocal demise. (Say "No" to drugs, kids. Now take your Ritalin and shut up.)

I found it somewhat painful to see the woman whose cover of "I Will Always Love You" is still stirring digress into this faded shadow of her former self with less than half of her once unbelievable talent. And yet the audience still gave her a standing ovation and acted as if she were still the moving pop singer that she had once been.

Thanks for crapping on my childhood memories there, Whitney. You made a night I only somewhat enjoyed even worse.

DWTS Finale: I'm Worried

Let me start this all by saying that I've never been a fan of the freestyle dance. Given total creative freedom and no clear cut guidelines, this performance rests mostly on the couple's ability to predict and live up to the judges' and audience's expectations of this expression of the celebrity's personality, as we have all determined it to be, based mostly on what we have seen on the show. So, it really comes down to how well they perform, based on what we think they're like.

That being said, Dmitry really dropped the ball this week. Not only does Hairspray not fit Mya at all (and you could tell, based on her initial reaction to Dmitry's idea), but it didn't do much to show Mya's biggest strength, namely that she's by far the best dancer of the three. Seriously, Dmitry, how could you not listen to your partner in a performance that's meant to best reveal her artistic expression? And how could you even think Hairspray would be a good idea? Nothing about the story of the lead is anything like Mya.

And everyone knew that the freestyle would be the dance Donny was probably going to get a perfect on; since this is what he's been doing successfully for his beloved fans (who vote for this show in large numbers) for several decades now.

As for Kelly, well... it's Kelly. She lasted into the finals through her popularity while more talented dancers kept losing. Her use of the song, "I Will Survive" for the freestyle seemed almost rudely ironic, as she again expressed that she has "survived" when, talent-wise, she already should have gone home. She didn't look good this week, despite all her confidence that she had a legitimate chance at winning the competition. And her freestyle was something of a nightmare, as she and partner Louis screwed up a lift and then ended horribly. The judges' scores of three 8's was entirely too generous, in my opinion.

The addition of the Mega-Mix in this season's finale was a good change, I thought. However, part of what makes it great is to separate the couples from best dancer to the worst, which would have been more important last year, when all three finalists were nearly perfect at the end. This year, there was Mya the dancer and Donny the performer with the large fanbase, and then there's Kelly. Keep in mind, I do think Donny did a great job with the Mega-Mix, and I'm sure it was a very close call as to who would take first, him or Mya. It probably came down to nothing more than Donny's poor posture at some points.

Going into the finals, I had the thought that Mya would need to be near perfect to beat Donny and his voters, or even to outlast Kelly's fans, some of whom have really turned on Mya. Apparently, since Mya had so much dancing ability coming into the competition, some people don't see that as being fair when compared to someone like Kelly who has none. That only helps Kelly's beloved underdog status, and makes her fans really hate Mya, who has done nothing but be the great dancer that she is.

The point difference between Mya and Kelly is significant, but is it enough? For that matter, will her slight point lead over Donny and her possible higher score tomorrow be enough to beat out his fans?

I am genuinely concerned that this could all come down to Dmitry's poor decision to ignore his partner's thoughts when it came to their freestyle performance.

John Woo Does Braveheart

Included with the HD package I have is the channel HDNet Movies, which once a month shows smaller or lesser known films that only come out in a VERY limited release. This has allowed me to see good films (The Girlfriend Experience, Burning Plain) and not so good films (The Mutant Chronicles). Last night, I got to see the Chinese language film, Red Cliff.

Red Cliff is an epic, Braveheart scale historical war film directed by John Woo, King of the Hong Kong action film scene of the nineties. And the film looks like an epic, Braveheart scale historical war film directed by John Woo.

The story revolves around the Three Kingdoms period in Chinese history, when the Emperor's Prime Minister Cao Cao had basically taken over, and decided to conquer the two kingdoms to the south and west, ruled by Lord Sun Quan and Lord Liu Bei. Cao Cao attacks them with a vastly superior force, driving the Lords to the fortress at Red Cliff, and the large, final battle.

The main characters (and thus heroes) of the film are not actually the Lords, but Sun Quan's Viceroy Zhou Yu and Liu Bei's strategist Zhun Liang, who meet Cao Cao's staggeringly massive forces with clever strategies, formations, and plans. What's odd about these two being who we follow most in the film, is what happens in the large battles.

Despite how many thousands of soldiers are fighting, and no matter what the formation or strategy is, Sun Quan's and Liu Bei's generals always find a way mid-battle to take on and take out dozens of soldiers and showcase what big badasses they are. In the middle of a war film where our leads are praised as and prove to be brilliant strategists, these scenes seem out of place, and contradictionary to the rest of the film. It's intelligence that is supposed to matter most, not brute strength.

Also, these fight scenes look and seem like Dynasty Warriors: The Film, with one General killing soldier after soldier who's armed only with a little pike, slowing down only when the other side's general needs to be killed (yes, I know the Dynasty Warriors video games take place in ancient Japan, not China, before anyone corrects me), and they just seem too unbelievable in the reality of this film.

Speaking of the massive fight scenes, Woo tries way too hard at times to make them cool. He adds overdramatic, unnecessary zoom-ins and close-ups, the quick cuts and edits can sometimes make the action hard to follow, and the soldiers of the opposing sides can often be indiscernible mid-battle, making it difficult to know who to root for.

This last issue is intentional, and Woo's been doing it for years. In the bloody, brutal gunfighting sequences of Hard Boiled and The Killer, you only really know who the "good guys" are in the end because they're the ones with Chow Yun Fat. This is supposed to show the oneness of humanity, and that we're all brothers, and violence is never good, which Woo suggests in both of these films and Red Cliff. Here's the problem (and I've had for years with Woo films): how can you argue against glorifying violence, when you're glorifying it in the same film? In Red Cliff, Woo even has Zhou Yu argue for the greatness of lasting peace, while implying that this can only be achieved through bloody, costly war.

Two more, niggling complaints: the ultimate action scene, like a Harry Potter novel, takes up about the final fourth of the film, and just feels way too long before it finally stops; and the CGI used to portray the shockingly large number of soldiers in these armies does not always blend as seamless as it should, so the film looks too digital at points.

Despite all these faults, I really did like this movie. Woo does a good job with most of the epic war scenes, the characters are likable and well-played, and the film brilliantly manages to focus on both a war taking up hundreds of thousands of lives and the three men at the center of it all. And it's fun in the way films like this can be, when you find you're enjoying yourself, despite (or maybe because of) how serious the characters are taking the situation.

So, go look for Red Cliff directed by John Woo, or I'll go all tortoise formation on you (if you see the film, you'll understand why that doesn't really make sense).

DWTS: Early Overview

Last season on Dancing with the Stars, we had Melissa Rycroft, Gilles Marini, and Shawn Johnson as the final three. Each of these three were all but perfect in the end, and were separated by the slightest of margins in the judges' scores. Melissa (a former Dallas Cowboys cheerleader) had natural dancing talent coming in, Gilles clearly had had some prior experience on the dance floor, and Shawn was driven in the final weeks to continously get better, leading to her overall victory.

This season, we have Mya as the far and away best dancer (and her scores have finally caught up, now that she's learned how to please Len Goodman). Then there's Donny, Mr. Popularity with some of this show's biggest demographics (and one helluva performer), and Kelly, the reality-star-who-could that has beaten out much better dancers to survive this long.

While I did say which two it would come down to weeks ago (Mya's dancing ability vs Donny's popularity), I'm still bothered both by how obviously the show is a popularity contest this season, and how much less the talent is this season as opposed to last season. Granted, I have witnessed a genuine and very commendable progression in both Donny's and Kelly's dancing abilities (and it has been great to see Kelly putting so much into the competition), but in the end, they're still not as good as Mya.

Now I like Kelly and root for her in an underdog/ Rudy kind of way, and even I have to admit that Donny is a great performer, but Mya just blows them away in every category. Well, possibly every category but one: the number of fans.

Donny, of course, had the largest fanbase coming into the competition, and has managed to win over even more people throughout the season. Kelly, due to occasional drama, her noticeable drive to win, and her aforementioned underdog status, has gained more fans than she ever had in her career before the show (such as it was).

Meanwhile Maya has simply been consistently good, and has now advanced to great. But will it be enough? Will the finals prove that superior talent is enough win over the judges and voters, or that simple popularity is all that really matters?

I'll have to wait for next week to decide how much I've liked or hated this season.

DWTS: Well, That was Kinda Crap

I did call this exact thing happening in a previous post. Granted, I called it an upset and mentioned it only as a possibility, but I knew that there was a chance Kelly's popularity could outstrip Joanna's superior dancing ability. However, now that it's happened, I have a problem with it.

Joanna has grace, she has musicality, she has sex appeal coming out of her pores, and this week, she finally showed a genuine emotions. Hell, she almost cried backstage after her second performance! And, honestly, she has grown on me and seemed increasingly nicer throughout the season.

But, in the end, Kelly's beloved (and apaprently growing) fanbase was able to pull her into the final three. Now don't get me wrong, I like Kelly. She has really dedicated herself to this competition and become a much better dancer as a result. She's been much less of a drama queen on this show as she was on the reality show, The Osbournes, and I will admit to rooting for her as the determined underdog. But she just isn't anywhere near as good a dancer as Joanna.

In all, this season... well, I'll get into that in another post. For now, I'll just say good-bye Joanna! I miss your beautiful blond body already. Oh, wait, you're in Playboy right now. Nevermind.

Humanity Insists on Disappointing Me

Last week, NASA found water on the moon. Not the trace amounts they had noticed before, but gallons of water. This is revolutionary! This single discovery could advance science, and have unforeseen effects on humanity's ability to travel outside of our atmosphere.

But what did NASA scientists have to waste their time on last week, instead of devoting further study to something that could have a monumental impact on our entire planet? Assuaging the fears of people who firmly believe that the world is going to end on December 21, 2012.

As part of the promotion for the recently released fictional (repeat FICTIONAL) film 2012, websites were set up touting the theory that the world's demise was predicted by the Mayans to occur on December 21, 2012. These sites joined others already in existence, making similar claims.

Here's the problem. The Mayans did not (repeat NOT) predict the end of the world. Nowhere on the Mayan calendar does it ever mention anything resembling a worldwide apocalypse; and the idea that it does arrived in the 1960s (centuries after the Mayans' demise) through a horrible mistranslation perpetrated by someone who clearly didn't know any better.

Despite this, the idea that the Mayans accurately foresaw our doom in little over three years has persisted, helped by a large viral campaign for the film and plenty of crackpots. This campaign included internet sites that feature "scientific" articles defending theories and bringing forward "evidence" of the world's end, and even a site where one could join a lottery that promises one the chance of surviving the oncoming cataclysm.

Sadly, there are lot of people who believe all of this nonsense. Enough people, that NASA scientists finally had to start publicly responding to the worried letters and even threats they've received in recent weeks (one person even wrote NASA to inform them that he planned to take both his own and HIS CHILDREN'S lives before 2012 to save them from whatever he thinks is coming). So, NASA has started addressing each of the various paranoid fears for the world's end, while also assuring the general public that they are not part of a massive government cover-up.

To sum up, NASA, after finding something that could have an impact for years to come, has had to waste time, money, and effort to assure STUPID people (my sister says the correct word is gullible, but I'm sticking with STUPID) that they will not be forced to survive some geothermal, magnetic, dark matter, cosmic energy-caused crisis in three years.

Oh, and the film made over 60 million. Really people, how dumb can you get?

Mad Men: In or Out?

I meant to post this a few days ago, but then I got distracted by my annoyance toward Serena Williams and celebrating Aaron Carter's departure from Dancing with the Stars (so many bitches, so little time).

Anyway, as for who joined the new Sterling, Cooper, Pryce, and Draper, the choices seem obvious. Don needed Sterling and Cooper for the money, and they all needed Pryce to actually pull it off. Don took Peggy because he has more of an emotional attachment to her than any of the other writers, and she is a better worker and better writer than anyone else he had. Also, he might still feel that he has more control over her than the other writers. They nabbed Pete because they needed his accounts to get more money to fund their new office, and Roger got Joan back to actually run the office (once they get an office). And then Cooper strong-armed Harry Crane into being head of media because they needed someone to lead the future of advertising and he is apparently easily bossed around.

So that's the new team. What about who they didn't let into the new clubhouse?

Kinsey's work has dropped, and it's been a while since he came up with anything good that Peggy didn't make better. It would be nice if they brought back Salvatore, but it doesn't seem likely. But what about Ken Cosgrove? He was over Pete, had worked there longer, and presumably had just as much money in his loyal accounts if not more (Pete even tried to steal at least one of Ken's). Pete did have the advantage of already lining up accounts to follow him as he bailed, but based on how Roger and Don reacted at the bar after they spoke to Pete, I don't think they knew he was leaving until they spoke to him.

So, why not Cosgrove? I've always really liked the guy. He's funny, doesn't take himself too seriously, and has so much more of a light-hearted attitude than Pete could ever pull off. Did they know Pete was bailing, and already lining up his clients? Or did Don and Roger just assume that Pete would be driven more than Cosgrove? Maybe they just assumed Cosgrove, being a not so serious, everything's a joke person, wouldn't risk his career by following them. But then, wouldn't he be more certain to follow? If he doesn't take his job that seriously, wouldn't he be that much more willing to drop everything and try something new and exciting?

The only answer I keep coming back to is that Roger and Don did know about Pete's planned absconding and took the opportunity to have the clients he was already stealing come to their new office (or hotel room).

Anyway, great episode. And I really did love the reactions of everyone left behind at the soon to be former Sterling Cooper.

Serena Williams: Are You Kidding Me?!!

Last Saturday, the Italian Fed Cup team beat the Americans 3-0 to clinch their second ever title, with Flavia Penetta beating the young Melanie Oudin 7-5, 6-2 in the deciding match. The Italians won the title through their brilliant play which came from love of their team, country, and team work. Three concepts which Serena Williams does not even know how to spell.

The younger of the Williams sisters, current world number one, and recent winner of the year-end WTA Championships, had agreed to play against the Italians and lead the team which neither she nor her sister had been a part of in quite some time. Instead, claiming "exhaustion" after defeating her sister in the WTA tournament, Serena backed out at the last minute, leaving the just-now 18 Oudin to shoulder both the responsibility of lead and the blame in the loss (which she personally decided to take in interviews).

And Serena was exhausted. So exhausted that she was forced to sign copies of her autobiography in London and appear on the Jonathon Ross show, England's equivalent to David Letterman. Indeed, she's still so exhausted that she's appearing on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart tonight, and will be a guest on The Joy Behar show at some point this week.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??!! Are these the actions of someone who has an ounce of team spirit or takes a moment to think of anyone other than herself? Is this really the kind of sports star people look up to now? Is this who children aspire to be? Someone who is so obviously self-absorbed that she'd gladly take whatever opportunity that benefits herself and to hell with anyone else? Someone who is so arrogant and deluded that she can actually go on The David Letterman Show and say with a straight face that she always gives "200%" in every match when anyone who's ever watched her outside of Wimbledon and the US Open knows damn well she doesn't?

Now, lightening up your schedule or even not putting as much into tournaments outside of the majors in the interest of your career's longevity is understandable in women's tennis (hell, they play about eight or nine months out of the year total). But blowing off your country's Fed Cup team in the Championships to plug your book literally makes me want to vomit, preferably all over Serena and whatever outfit she's selling in stores now instead of playing tennis.

None of this is meant to imply that the Italians didn't deserve their victory. Not only did they consistently outplay the Americans, but two of the Italians skipped the lower-tier year end WTA tournament to play in the Cup Champioships. Had team leader Flavia Penetta (already the highest ranked Italian woman since they started the modern ranking system) played in this tournament, she could have ended the season ranked in the top ten, which would have meant more money and an easier time at tournaments. Instead, she decided to think of someone else and focus on her country and her teammates. What a novel concept, eh Serena?

And I'm not alone in my Serena bashing, this time. Sandra Harwitt, a tennis blogger for ESPN.com lays blame on Serena for forcing the still-inexperienced (despite what she wants to think) Oudin on becoming team leader, both on court and off. And Oudin, when asked if she could understand someone skipping on representing the US, had this to say, "I wanted to come here. I wanted to play for my country. Other people... choose different things. Some people... didn't want to play as badly as I did."

Now, I'm not going to watch Serena's interviews on either the Daily Show or Joy Behar Show unless I hear that one of them asked, implied, or at least hinted at what I really want to know. "You bailed out on your country, teammates, and sport to raise sales of a book that, to an outsider, just sounds like more stroking of your already inflated ego. Mind answering WHY?"

DWTS: Fingers Crossed

Even before last night's show, the two dancers in biggest danger of leaving this week were Kelly and Aaron. Kelly because she's easily the worst dancer left, and Aaron because she's (sorry, "he's"... Freudian slip) the least popular celebrity. After last night's performances, that hasn't changed, nor has last night made me rethink my pick for final three: Joanna, Mya, and Donny, with it all coming down to either Donny and his massive fanbase or Mya and her new-found fans.

As for this week, Aaron (as we all saw last week when he had great scores but had to win in a dance-off), is still not getting any of the fan's votes. I will admit that he has become a much better dancer and he has gotten better at hiding the raging, emotional drama queen inside of him; but he still looked like he was about to burst into tears last week when the judges announced that he had won! You just survived another week despite how few people like you, and you look worse than the guy who lost! Seriously, man, grow some balls!

Kelly, on the other hand, has gotten more and more popular as the show has progressed, winning over the older fan-base who might not recall her famous father, much less the attempted popstar Kelly. Kelly actually could sneak in as the not as talented but very popular finalist and beat out Joanna. First, of course, she would have to survive tonight, but I don't think that will be a problem.

Looking ahead to my picks for final three, Joanna has had a huge turn-around by toning down the bitchiness and coming across as much more gentle and likable, even backstage when the focus is not on her. Her partner Derek has helped with that a lot. His natural jokiness and complete lack of ability to take himself or anything else too seriously have perfectly balanced out Joanna's colder attitudes. Mya meanwhile, has toned down the performance part of her routines and stressed the dancing, and finally won over Len, her last obstacle to potentially winning the whole thing. Then there's Donny, the single most popular person going into the competition, and since his dancing abilities have gotten better throughout the season, he has won over even more fans, which could make him the first man to win in quite a few seasons.

So, here's hoping we're done with Aaron tonight! And win or lose, I'm sure we'll see some tears.

Mad Men Finale

I REALLY liked this episode. It was a complete departure from the series' usual tone. While we've gotten used to the show being a slow, quiet, dramatic build-up towards a climax that is itself slow and quiet, this show had action, speed, and a sense of urgency. And it was funny! The show has always had enough of a sense of humor to keep it from being an over-the-top melodrama, but they really gave this finale a light-hearted tone, and it worked!

Jon Hamm was brilliant. The way he handled a new direction for Don Draper, one where Don has been humbled enough to stop fighting his wife's departure and move on to dealing with what comes next; and I loved Hamm's scene with Peggy. Draper finally had to face up to how he had treated Betty, Peggy, Roger, and well, everyone really. This episode was when Don finally realized he needed other people and he couldn't just treat them all however he liked, do whatever he wanted, and assume it would all end well for him.

Consistent with the quicker tone and action of the finale, Cooper and Roger finally did something, which was nice to see. Hell, other than show up for the odd meeting and give his random two cents, this was the first time I'd ever seen Cooper really working at all. And it took Don to get him, Roger, and Pryce off their lazy, executive asses to actively fight against the cold hearted businessmen that had done their best to buy their submission along with their ad agency.

Not to say that Draper, Sterling, Cooper, and Pryce will be any less greedy or shallow, but at least they're not in the habit of buying and selling people the way their new bosses have been. They're just a little too "It's not personal, it's just business" while dealing with people's livelihoods.

Sometimes shows hit a Reset button as a way to get various characters back together under circumstances at least similar to the way they had previously been, but I don't think that's what this was. The whole tone of the episode, the speed, the way the characters had to interact differently than before. This seems like more of a change in direction for the show; the building of something new as opposed to simply continuing what was already there.

This seems to be a shift in focus and direction for the show, but I'm loving it.

Note to Readers... All Five of You

After you post a comment, make sure that it actually went up. For some reason, it doesn't always work on the first attempt; so just pan down after hitting Post Comment to make sure it posted. If it didn't, it should still be in the comment box, so just hit Post again. It always works for me on the first or second attempt.

I'll e-mail Blogger to see what's up, just watch out in the meantime.

This Season's Sci-Fi

Fringe: After only slightly watching the show last season, I've really liked it so far this year. They decided to focus the show more, instead of just having the "monster of the week" format with an over-riding plot tying it all together. Starting with Olivia's meeting with Spock (or Leonard Nemoy, or whatever the hell his name is on the show... look, he'll always be Spock to everyone no matter what he does), they're now building up to an oncoming invasion by the beings from another universe. So, in lieu of "The Pattern" of last season, we now have a straight line pointing towards a big battle or war or whatever comes next. I think this has helped the show a lot, and they're handling the relationship between Olivia and Pacey (sorry, Peter) better than most shows. And Walter is just always fun to watch.

Flash Forward: This show has definitely lived up to its own insane hype. Following in the footsteps of Battlestar Galactica, the creators decided to feature an unbelievable, sci-fi premise, but then make the characters and situations completely believable. The actors have a lot to do with this, and the way they realistically handle knowing their own future is brilliant. This week, the show had its first major death when Al, one of the F.B.I. agents working to discover the truth behind the flash forwards, jumped off a roof to prevent himself from accidentally killing a woman he hadn't met yet. This is a big moment for the show, which up till now had been focused on bringing about the future everyone saw. Now, the show is giving us the possibility that the characters can change the future, its just a matter of how.

V: I was really looking forward to this show. And then I watched it. Well, I watched about fifteen minutes of it, which was long enough to tell that the characters were obvious, cliche, and horribly over-done; the acting wasn't good; and there was nothing likable about the leads. I now know why ABC limited the half-season order to a six episode mini-series. I'm only curious why they put this waste of airtime on at all.

Heroes: I still really like this show, to hell with what the ratings say. My one recurring issue is that the show keeps repeating itself in that it can't let any one character get too powerful. Ever since the first season, when Hiro lost his powers and then into the second when Peter had his mind wiped and then lost everything only to get some of it again and Sylar keeps getting weakened somehow and... Well, you see my point, and I'm just really sick of that. Let someone be a bad-ass! That would be a unique twist for the show at this point, and might bring back some viewers!

Supernatural: I am loving this show! Like Joss Whedon on Buffy and Angel, the creators have structured each season around one "big/bad" or one big issue, all the while building up to this season, which all involved swear is the final season. This means that even while having a "monster of the week," they're moving toward something specific. They've also been great at meta-fictional and self-aware humor, like when they had Paris Hilton guest star as a god who took the form of Paris Hilton to gain her fan's love, and then kill her. Or this week's episode, when the heroes, Sam and Dean, were trapped by a Trickster in numerous television parodies, including Grey's Anatomy (where they mocked that show's use of a ghost), a perfect C.S.I. send-up. a cheesy sitcom, and even a commercial for genital herpes medication. At this rate, the show is heading to one great finale!

Mad Men Randoms

That other post had gotten kind of long, so I decided to leave out some other short thoughts I had for a separate post.

First of all, I do not like Peggy with Duck. For one thing, I never liked Duck, he always seemed like a smarmy little prick to me. For another, this whole thing with Peggy seeking out the comforts of an older man bugs me. I liked it better when she was like "one of the guys" and she just picked up some young college guy who thought she was a secretary then ditched him in the middle of the night. Though I did think it was funny when Peggy's roommate assumed that Duck was married. Because an older married man sleeping with a younger woman is standard for that world, a single older man dating a younger woman apparently seems strange.

I liked that part at the end, when Peggy decided to work through her mourning by actually working. She really is the hardest, most devoted worker at Sterling, Price, and Cooper.

How the hell is Salvatore "gone"? Where did he go? Was he fired for not letting that asshole molest him in the editing room? Did he move on to another job? While this is kind of par for the course with the show and how they deal with some people leaving, they usually provide us with more than one casual, throw-away line.

Finally, that whiny bitch Pete Campbell might have something valid to complain about this time. He just approaches dealing with his clients differently than Cosgrove, favoring their opinions of how their money's being spent as opposed to convincing them to like how their money's being spent. So, Cosgrove is the new boss, and Pete gets a new title for his door. Wonder if he'll even bother staying now, especially if the place gets sold?

Oh, that reminds me, was buying, cutting up, and/or re-selling businesses that common in the 60s? I know it is now, but I don't really know that much about business practices of the time.

Mad Men and Monogamy

WOW!! Last night's episode had two of the most shocking lines I have ever heard on Mad Men! First was Betty's lover proposing (even though they haven't really done much yet, and, oh yeah, she's married!), then we heard Betty say she feels no love for Don! That was unbelievable! But, more on that later. For now, I'll focus on Roger Sterling.

Dear God, his daughter was a spoiled little bitch! She just kept whining because "everything's not exactly the way I want it to be and boo-hoo-hoo." And she actually called her father while arguing with her mother! I mean when the hell is she gonna grow up, if not right before she gets married? But, she recovered from everything, seemed to genuinely enjoy herself at her wedding, and she was nice. That was good to see, someone we've only ever seen as a spoiled, self-absorbed little girl smiling and having fun despite her wedding being overshadowed and her attendance being vanquished by national tragedy.

Speaking of turn-arounds, boy has Roger been back and forth lately. Last week, he turned down the girl who broke his heart, then looked sad as he spoke to Joan for the first time in a while. In all, last week he seemed happy with his young wife Jane while still looking back at the fish that got away. Then this week, he yells his head off at Jane for not doing exactly what he wants her to do (because God forbid a woman try to get along with her spoiled step-daughter), gets snippy when she refuses to see the woman who despises her, and drunk dials Joan, whom he apparently feels is the only person he can really open up to.

Though Roger did manage to be funny, charming, and likable at his daughter's wedding, despite how much he hated her attitude at the episode's beginning. Although, this probably goes along with Roger (a) preferring to laugh at everything and (b) I think he comes from old money, and if there's one thing they do right, it's ignore everything going on in the world and all the issues they have with everyone in their lives to put on a happy face and throw and good party for the public. Appearances always being so much more important than reality.

On that note, we move on to Don. Last week, he was finally forced to confront Betty completely exposed as himself. Jon Hamm was brilliant in this episode, as you actually saw the Don persona vanish, and he finally had to look at Betty as the man he really is, not as the man he created to leave his old life behind. That revelation seems to have changed him into a kinder, gentler man who actually stays at home and helps raise his children, instead of running around with his latest young thing.

Throwing a monkey wrench into Don's plan of at least attempting to be a better man is Betty's still-lingering negative feelings towards... well, towards everything Don has done in the past now aided by an attraction to an older man (younger woman seeks out older man following death of her father... hmmm, interesting). Still, how can her newly discovered lack of affection for Don play out? Both Betty and Don have always struck me as being of the opinion that once married, always married, certainly if there are kids involved. So can the possibility of another marriage be something for Betty to turn to, or would she stay where she is, or possibly choose neither? There wouldn't have been that many options for a woman in her position at that time, so another man might help make up her mind, but could she really deal with the havoc that would probably cause her family? And why does Betty keep doing things like this during times of crisis? She had sex with that guy she met in a bar during the Cuban missile crisis, and now she says she doesn't love Don any more after Kennedy gets shot. Maybe she should stop making big decisions while watching a lot of news on television.

What about Don in all of this? What's he to do, since he's exhausted the only things he knows to do to keep Betty and his illusion of a happy family going? And why do I pity and even like a guy who's done so much to deserve what's happening to him?

One last thing, what the hell's wrong with this guy, proposing to married woman he hasn't actually even had an affair with? Just because you're attracted to the younger married woman who you think needs saving from whatever doesn't mean you go all the way with it before you've gone all the way with her. What's he thinking, and how does he see this ending? Kind of hard to ride in on your white horse and save the damsel in distress when you look a lot like an older version of the knight she's leaving, genius.

DWTS: No Surprises Here

In a complete turn around from last week, this week's bottom three actually were the three worst dancers left.

Melissa Joan Hart losing outright wasn't at all shocking, since (a) based on where she finished last week, she doesn't have that many of the audience's votes, and (b) she peeked too soon! Her Charleston was great, but that's a performance-heavy dance and not a talent-heavy one, so, as an actress, she had an easier time with it. In the weeks since she has been getting worse, making both the judges and audience turn against her.

Louie finally going out wasn't surprising at all, though I do suspect that the producers asked one of the judges to vote for him in the dance-off against Michael Irvin to bring it down to the final vote and add suspense. And now Louie can finally get back to his real job!

One last thing: I am tired of Aaron Carter. I know he's been dancing better recently, but he was so moved by the judges' compliments that he looked ready to burst into tears while they were saying nice things about him! If you were a woman, that would annoy me, but since you're supposedly a man, it actually angers me. I mean, really man, grow some damn balls.

"I got a rock."

That is one of the greatest lines in animation history!

I mean, who are all these people who give out rocks as Halloween treats, and why do they keep giving them to the kid with too many eye-holes cut out of his bedsheet? Even Pigpen, walking in a permanent cloud of dust and probably smelling like dirty laundry dipped in a sewer, gets actual candy, but poor old Charlie Brown just keeps getting rocks.

And the line is delivered brilliantly. Peter Robbins, with this low, almost flat monotone adds an air of "Well, I expected this," to those four words, but with more than a hint of disappointment. As if on some level, Charlie Brown really thinks that maybe this next house will finally be the one that gives him something good, but still not believeing that whole-heartedly.

It's like Lucy offering to hold the football: every time Charlie Brown falls for it because he wants to believe that this time will be different, but he knows deep inside that it won't end well for him.

And that's part of why we all love Charlie Brown: he assumes everything will end horribly, but he still has hope.

Another Halloween's come and gone, and all I got was a bag of rocks.

How is it "Freerunning" if you have to do it in a Specific Spot?

I, along with many people all over the world have seen plenty of Youtube clips of some lunatic attempting (and often failing) to do a backflip off of, or onto a building, jump from one piece of playground equipment to another, or do handstands in some of the most dangerous places imaginable.

When one succedes at these stunts, then one is partaking in a sport known as "freerunning" (when you fail, you just look like an idiot). This sport (sometimes spelled as two words, sometimes as one, I have no idea which is correct, nor I think does anyone else) evolved from the French "parkour" by adding more acrobatics and the new philosophy of a complete freedom of movement. Freerunners (as seen in the BBC specials Jump London and Jump Britian) cover urban landscapes in a new way, finding a path from one building to the next, from one street to another, or across or through any structure one finds in a city that no one else would even consider trying.

Thus, freerunning stresses freedom of movement and expression; a person's imagination and physical abilities the only obstacles to discovering a new way to look at and travel the cities of the world, even as these cities themselves become increasingly homogenous and repetitive.

So, how can you have a Freerunning Competition that forces the freerunners to do all of their work within a relatively small stadium?

I just watched G4's coverage of the 2009 Barclaycard Freerun Championships. The competition took place in London a few weeks ago, housed within a structure built specifically for this reason. The stage had mulptile levels, metal bars, concrete tables, and a seperate, smaller stage so competitors could leap onto and off of it. They had one run of sixty seconds, then, the top ten went a second time to determine a winner. They were scored on their tricks' difficulty, the fluidity of their runs, how well they accomplished their tricks, and creativity.

The competition was fun and impressive to watch and even though I'd never seen one of these before today, even I could tell that the winner Tim "Livewire" Shieff was, by far, the best one.
However, this is a competition in a sport that is supposed to stress freedom limited only by one's own capabilities. So, by putting it into a specifically limited space aren't you already going away from the initial ideas of the sport? There was scaffolding enclosing the competition space, which I thought looked perfect for some of these tricks (it would certainly help your creativity score), but, I kept wondering whether or not the competitors had been told to stay off of it or risk being disqualified. And if that's true, haven't you already lost?

I suppose this is how freestyle street skateboarders first felt when the X-Games and other groups started moving their freedom of movement sport to a small, prescribed space. Actually, some still feel like that, and there is an ongoing controvery between some freerunners, those who compete in freerunning compeitions, and parkour enthusiasts, who believe any competition completely misses the point.

Now that I think about it, any sport like skateboarding, freerunning, or whatever will come next has to lose some of its original spirit in order to become bigger and reach a wider audience. They are selling out to a certain extent, but they're also adapting to changing tastes as one's pastime gets more and more famous on a larger, worldwide scale.

So here's how it works: you start something that gets really popular among a select group; then it starts to spread out from your small fanbase to a wider audience; then you have to continue to grow for the good of the sport you made, so you change some things to make it more accessible; then it gets really popular and you're a genius and a founder of a major sport, but it isn't quite what you originally made, and you just have to hope you were among the first ones to start getting money from what you created in the first place.

Ying/ Yang, Female/ Male, Passive/ Active, Crap/ Could Be Cool

I preface this post by saying that I have neither read any of the Twilight books nor seen the film. For that matter, I have no intention of ever seeing or reading any of the Twilight series of books or films, unless someone holds a gun to my head (and even then, Hell might be preferable to reading page after page of Stephenie Meyer's whiny, teenaged protagonist). I have also not read any of the Cirque Du Freak books, and I am still undecided as to whether or not I will see the film The Vampire's Assistant. All of what follows comes from what I've seen or read about any of the works involved. So, forgive me if I get anything wrong, but I have absolutely no desire to read a teenager gushing about her hottie Prince Charming Vampire for over a thousand pages.

In an interview about the film The Vampire's Assistant, John C. Reilly mentioned that this story is really a young male's fantasy version of the vampire story. This reminded me that I've always forgiven the popularity of Twilight as the epitome of a young girl's fantasy, but just consider how different these fantasies are.

In Twilight, the heroine, Bella, falls for and meets the vampire of her affection after he saves her life, which he then continues to do, while never going all the way with her because he loves her too much or some such nonsence (vampires I can buy, but a straight guy not gettin' down with his girlfriend Kristin Stewart, now that's unbelievable!). Bella plays the part of fairy tale damsel in distress with Edward as the Prince Charming/ bad boy of the story.

In the trailers for the sequel New Moon, Bella is even seen putting herself in mortal danger in an attempt to bring Edward back to her. Because that's a sign of a healthy relationship that young girls should definitely look forward to trying at some point in their lives. Hey kids, do you want to get that hottie ex-boyfriend to come back to you? Try almost dying! Why doesn't Bella just cut herself like so many of Twilight's fans are already doing?

Bella's role in the story is passive, even her activities are attempts to push Edward to make a move for her. Darren's role in Vampire's Assistant is active.

In this story, Darren has a normal, boring suburban, middle-American life until a circus comes to town and Darren decides to ditch his family, say "Screw you" to his best friend, and become a vampire. Darren isn't begging for anyone to save him from anything other than staggering normalcy; that's not how boys think, that's not what we dream of. We don't want some hottie Princess Charming to ride in and save our asses, we want to do the saving.

We want to have adventures, fight off the bad guys, save some girls (and whatever comes after that), and, oh yeah, live forever. To hell with getting old, getting some crap job, marrying some woman we might not be able to stand, having some kids, and then dying unfulfilled and bored in a retirement home somewhere. We want to be forever young with superpowers and kick ass until the world ends, which hopefully wouldn't be until we're done having fun.

Boys grow up reading comicbooks and that's what we dream of becoming, superheroes. Darren is Superman, Bella is Lois Lane (before feminism got hold of her, and made her intelligent and independent). Darren goes off and has adventures, Bella desperately wants someone to come to her. As to which one is the better fantasy in terms of the long-lasting impact upon the young who have them, I have no idea and I'm not even going to try to judge.

All I know is, I want the cool one.

DWTS: The Result of Having so Many Competitors

There is a problem with having more competitors at this late stage than the show has ever had before. Namely, there aren't more viewers or vewiers with more of an attention span to go along with the larger cast. As a result, some celebrities simply get ignored by both the viewers and those who comment on and cover the show. This is part of why Natalie Coughlin went off WAYYY too soon on last night's show.

Here's my theories on the bottom four, Natalie, Aaron Carter, Joanna Krupa, and Melissa Joan Hart. Aaron is still suffering from his unpopularity of the last few weeks, but survives through a devoted following. Joanna, despite her dancing abilities, is something of a bitch (boy, did she looked pissed while waiting for the results!). And, if there's something the female audeince doesn't want to see, it's a woman who's both much prettier than they are, and has a horrible attitude. However, she no doubt recieved sympathy as a result of her partner Derek Hough's illness keeping him off the dancefloor this week. So, she gets at least one more try to get people to like her for reasons other her looks.

Then there's Melissa and Natalie. Melissa started off OK, and then got better. Meanwhile, Natalie has been good throughout. The female voters probably have a lot of love for Melissa as a mother and an older woman than others on the show. But Natalie, despite being graceful, expessive, naturally talented, and a great dancer, didn't have any drama, and thus no attention.

See, while Louie Vito and Michael Irvin have had rollercoaster performances (good one week, bad the next), their efforts to come back endear them to the audience, and makes them memorable, as do their personalities. Natalie is nice and comes across as a determined competitor, but, lacking the drama and outgoing personalities of her co-athletes, she's just not as memorable. And, when there are this many more dancers to follow and vote for, being noticed and remembered becomes even more important than in previous seasons.

So Natalie, Carrie Anne's favorite and a very talented dancer, goes out while neither Michael nor Louie are even in the bottom four, and these two were by far the worst dancers left! I'm saying that and I honestly like these guys, which raises another point.

Yes, this show is, at its most basic, a dancing competition. However, it is also a program people watch for the sake of entertainment. So, people naturally vote for those they find the most entertaining. It's how Cloris Leachman lasted so long despite the fact that she could barely move; viewers (including me) were getting an odd kind of joy watching an older woman be led around and molested by a younger dancer who also looked like he was having a lot of fun. This is the double-edged sword of this type of show: as a talent competition, the judges want the best ones to advance, while the viewers and voters (who are the only reason the show stays on the air) just want the ones they like to keep going, to hell with how good or bad they are!

The "dance-offs" of the coming weeks will help clear this up a little, but, it could very well happen that, fearing their loss in a dance-off, Michael and Louie's fans will vote in massive numbers to keep them out of the bottom four as they did this week.

Oh, well. As long as Mya wins in the end, the best dancer will prevail, it's just who else will be with her in the finals that might be questionable.

Warren Zevon, What were you On?!!!

My crappy POS car has no working radio. Well, actually, the radio works, but it only gets AM stations, but since I'm not really old or a right-wingnut, I'm stuck using the old cassette player, which also doesn't always work that great. So, since I can't find one of those things that plugs into a discman and plays in a cassette player (Does anyone even remember what those things were called? Anyone?.... Bueller?....), for the sake of variety I've been buying used cassettes.

One of my recent purchases of the musical media that time forgot was A Quiet Normal Life: The Best of Warren Zevon, released in the mid-eighties. Now, I love Warren, I have for years, and I think the bittersweet brilliance of The Wind (his last album released during his lifetime) is unmatched by almost any other piece of modern music. I mean, he was recording this while recieving cancer treatments just to buy him enough time to finish the album and see the next James Bond film (he accomplished both, and I heard he liked the movie, which happened to be Die Another Day). The album is a fitting end to the over thirty year career of a man who always managed to be just to the left of massive fame and acclaim.

All that being said, however, I simply must ask, Warren, what drugs and how much were you taking when you wrote these songs? Even ignoring the enjoyably bizzare "Werewolves of London" (Why do you want to meet a werewolf's tailor? How can a werewolf's hair be "perfect"? What is "the werewolves of London" and how are Lon Chaney and Lon Chaney Jr. doing "it with the Queen?"), the greatest hits album is rife with imagery, lyrics, and concepts that make you go "WHAT"?

Here's a quick sample. This is from "Excitable Boy,"

After ten long years they took him out of the home,
Excitable boy they all said
And he dug up her grave and built a cage with her bones
Excitable boy they all said.

And that's the title track from one of his better selling albums!

Or here's another famous one, "Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner." The song tells the story of a mercenary hired to fight in Vietnam who then has his head blown off by the CIA that hired him. Roland, naturally, rises from the grave to seek vengence as a headless thompson gunner. The song is either meant to be metaphorical, allegorical, or just weirdness for weirdness' sake. Or it could very well be all three.

Warren's surreal storytelling isn't limited to the supernatural, either. In "Ain't That Pretty at All," an angry sounding Warren backed by guitars that seem to be stoking his rage, describes travelling back to Paris, visiting the Louvre, and then he's going to get a good running start and hurl myself at the wall!

Why? What could you possibly have against the walls of the Louvre?

His interactions with women are just as odd. "Poor Poor Pitiful Me" ends with,

Well, I met a girl at the Rainbow Bar
She asked me if I'd beat her
She took me to the Hyatt House
... I don't want to talk about it

If its something even Warren won't share, God only knows how that night went.

Then there's what passes for a love song on the album. The lovely and sad "Accidentally Like a Martyr" is a brilliant and touching song, but just try and make sense of this refrain.

We made mad love
Shadow love
Random love
And abandoned love
Accidentally like a martyr
The hurt gts worse and the heart gets harder.

How can you.... What does that even.... Oh, nevermind. Rest in Peace, Warren. If I took twice as many drugs as you, I still wouldn't have half your talent.

Mini-Post, DWTS: Samantha's Hair, WTF?!!

Seriously, who is letting Samantha Harris go on live, national television looking like that? She looked like her head got gang-raped by curlers, extensions, and glue and then they kicked her out of bed and in front of the cameras. This isn't even the first time she's looked liked this; how the hell does this keep happening? I could do better hair than that, and I barely even keep mine clean!

I'd post a picture, but I'm not sure how to do that yet. I have got to start getting better at this posting thing. Also, apologies to my sole follower, but when one encounters hair this bad, it deserves a mention.

Mad Family Sunday

This has been coming for a while now on Mad Men, and it finally seems to be coming to a head; Don's latest affair is getting creepily serious. I mean, what is she thinking? She had Don sized up right as soon as they met, the philandering husband who's always looking for the latest conquest. Of course, she falls for his charms anyway (you could see an obvious attraction even when she was rejecting him, and really, Jon Hamm is awesome!), but now she's getting genuinely attached.

Where exactly does she see this relationship going? Don's not going to leave his wife, and even if he were, it wouldn't be for you.

January Jones was brilliant this week. In the scene where Betty finds the key to Don's secret drawer, you can read this secret pleasure on her face as she anticipates finally seeing proof of Don's affairs and the life he has when he isn't with her and the children. Instead, she finds.... Dick. One can't even imagine what she was thinking to learn her husband literally had another life before they met, or how this will affect their relationship, though the teaser did show Betty packing a suitcase. However, I've gotten used to these being horribly misleading, so that might not mean anything.

Also loved that bit between Peggy and Kinsey at the end of the show. They were totally just making things up off the top of their heads (Don was surprisingly sympathetic towards Kinsey), and then Peggy just said something brilliant. Kinsey's reaction was priceless, he just stared at Peggy, aghast by her natural abilities which he apparently hasn't noticed until that moment.

Also on television last night, Family Guy did their take on three stories by Stephen King: Stand by Me, Misery, and Shawshank Redemption. They were well done and this was a good episode; in part because it didn't have my usual problem with Family Guy which is that its just a series of random jokes that have little to nothing to do with the supposed storyline (if you want to do a sketch show, do a sketch show, don't try to mask it with a barely-there plot!). However, this episode came the same night as the latest Simpsons Treehouse of Horror (another good show on Fox last night).

Now, I don't know who's fault that is, but it seemed that Family Guy was trying to go after one of Simpsons more famous episodes of the year with their own weird, short stories. So this is either a "booo" to the Family Guy creators for being dicks by going after a show that's one of the main reasons they're on the air at all, or to the Fox Network for scheduling these shows on the same night.

In other Sunday tv news, Titan Maximum finally ditched their random jokes and managed to stay focused on jokes that didn't just pop out of left field, and Venture Bros. came back with a new season. Venture Bros. was good, but the episode was told out of sequence and organized in a way that doesn't make sense until the end (and even then you might not get it if you're not as big a geek as I am), so, I feel like I have to watch the whole thing all over again. Although, the episode was good enough I really wouldn't mind seeing it again so I guess that's alright.

In all, a good Sunday's worth of television.

DWTS Update!

OK, this is seriously starting to become Bobby Bill's DWTS Blog, but I really had to comment on what happened on this week's Results Show.

WOW!! Where the hell did that come from??!!! Now Chuck Liddell being in the bottom two and exiting wasn't really a shocker. He's never been a good dancer, and he wasn't going to be getting any better.

But Aaron Carter being in the bottom two!! Now that was surprising, and I'm sure it caused some tears the little wimp didn't want to show on camera. The big question though, is why? Granted, his scores have fallen in the past two weeks while others have been getting better, but he still wasn't as low as either Louie Vito or Michael Irvin. Yet these two survive unscathed, while Aaron had to wait the show out to the end.

So, what's the deal here? Is Aaron a little too "fabulous," or "light on his feet" for the fans? Or, is it the whiny, crying thing people don't like to see in a man? Well, a straight man, anyway, and even if Aaron is gay (I don't know for sure, but I have a pretty good idea) he would still be annoying.

Anyhoo, Louie not being in the bottom two was another shocker of the night (he and Irvin are easily the worst dancers left), but I have heard a good theory why the fans are starting to like the pro snowboarder they'd never heard of until a few weeks ago. Louie does not fit the "Whoa, dude, let's get stoned and hit the slopes," stereotype that quite a few viewers probably have about snowboarders (for the record, very few if any of the pros are anything like that); so he's a pleasant surprise while also being likable as such a nice and positive person. Meanwhile, Louie, being an athlete, has a competitive spirit, which drives him to keep doing better. And, while the fans are liking Louie more the more they see of him, they seem to be getting sick of Aaron and his histrionics.

So, in all, Go Louie! I'm a big fan, and have been for years, but, seriously, for the sake of your ACTUAL CAREER, it might be great if you have another bad week.

DWTS: Part Two, Louis, Louis

Like most people who watch Dancing with the Stars, I don't know a lot about the dances being performed, and I probably couldn't tell one from another, other than having a guess if one were a latin or a ballroom dance (and there, you're helped by the music and outfits).

However, having grown up in a small town in mid-Missouri, I do know what a two-step looks like, while snowboarder Louis Vito and his partner Chelsie Hightower clearly don't. Now, I can understand if someone didn't have the bad luck of growing up near rednecks; however, if you know the dance is coming up, and you know you have to choreograph and then perform the damn thing, why not at least google it?!!

I know Louis didn't look good in last night's performance, but I really am putting the blame of this one on Chelsie. She's supposed to be the pro dancer, she's supposed to be the one who knows the dance, she's supposed to figure out how to make her partner look as good as possible. Instead, Chelsie put together a performance that seemed to say, "Nether of us know what to do, so why don't you just walk me around like a show pony, and I'll do flip tricks and stuff and smile and we'll see how that turns out."

Complicating things for Louis is the fact that Michael Irvin has a much larger built-in fan base among the show's demographic going into the competition. On that note, many members of the key demographic (being female and 30s, 40s or older... namely, the opposite of me), not only don't recognize the former Olympian, they barely acknowledge his sport as a sport.

So, I think this is it for Louis, but there is a bright side. Now, he can go back to his real job and start training for the Olympics, which he should have been doing all along instead of learning how to DANCE!!

Seriously, man, what were thinking here? The show lasts potentially until December, the Olympics are in February, did you really expect to turn around, qualify for the US team, and be ready for the largest stage in your sport in three months?! Shaun White's the best snowboarder in the world, and he didn't even compete in skateboarding this year to prepare for Vancouver.

Assuming you do lose tonight Louis, consider it a blessing. If, however, you don't get eliminated, you might consider just backing out. The competition just to qualify for the US freestyle snowboard team is stiff, and clearly, at the moment, your head's not in the right game.

DWTS: Part One, Explanation

I begin this two-part post with an explanation. My sister started watching Dancing with the Stars, and I ended up watching the show with her.

Whenever Heroes and/or Chuck weren't on, or were in reruns, we would follow DWTS, or would flip to it during commercials. Now that Chuck has vanished until after the Olympics, we watch the second hour of DWTS (has anyone else noticed that we abbreviate everything now? we are so damn lazy) after Heroes.

Added to this is the sad fact that I now always feel that I have to have something on television to watch. I didn't used to be like this. In high school, I know I didn't watch that much tv, and I had homework, anyway. Then, in undergrad, I would work some nights, plus I had homework, and I still wasn't watching it every night I could. Finally, in grad school, I would work some nights, I had night classes, and I still had reading and papers to do for class.

So, it wasn't until recently that I found I had nothing else to do at night other than watch television, which leads me to watch and follow shows that I normally wouldn't consider (Eastwick being the worst example of this).

Also, when one watches one of the many reality competition shows on a regular basis, you start to get into it without trying or maybe even wanting to, then you become an avid follower, and then you find yourself rooting for someone, rating the performances, and possibly even seeing what the judges see (though I'm not sure anyone always sees what Len Goodman sees).

So, for all these reasons and through this transition, I have gotten into Dancing with the Stars. At least there are hot women wearing revealing clothing and dancing sexy, so I can pretend I'm still something of a guy while watching.

Titan Chicken, or Robot Maximum?

Last night, I watched the third episode of Titan Maximum, the new show from the creators of Robot Chicken.

It is very funny, clever, and original to see a dead-on parody of celebrity and heroism. The show, which follows the adventures of the re-formed Titan Force Five as they defend the universe from their former douchebag comrade, is like revisiting an old Japanese giant robot cartoon through the modern eye of cynicism and celebrity scandal.

But, the creators seem to have an issue staying focused on their own plots. This was brutally apparent in the half-hour pilot, as the show kept going off on tangential jokes about characters all but completely unconnected to the show's plotline. They have done this much less in the two 15 minute episodes that have followed, but the fact that they still do it at all is distracting and a bit annoying.

See, for those of you who don't know, on Cartoon Network's Adult Swim, a so-called 15 minute episode is really only about twelve or thirteen minutes; which is fine, considering the show is stop-motion, and if it were longer it would be a bitch to make a whole season. What is not so fine is when an actual plot-based show like Titan Maximum decides to take away from its brief episode length to focus on some random joke about people we'll never see again. It seems that the creators aren't used to limiting their focus on just a few characters and follow only one plot, being too used to Robot Chicken's random, unconnected sketch format.

None of this means I'm not enjoying the show (which I am) or that I don't think its funny (which I do, even the random, unconnected parts), but, if you want to make a plot-based show, make a plot-based show! Don't go only most of the way with it, and then throw us a joke out of left field about nothing to do with anything! Make up your damned mind, control your ADD, and this show will be even better than it is now!

And if anyone is actually reading this, please give me some sign. I'm new to the whole blogging thing, and could use the reassurance that its not just me talking to myself.

Hollywood, Stay out of Zombieland!

I love zombie movies and Zombieland is a great addition to that genre. It's fun, funny, clever, and even the acting's good (and with this kind of movie, the acting is usually what you have to forgive to enjoy yourself).

Woody Harrelson is great as this cowboy/ psycho/ zombie-killing badass who is both awesome and hilarious. Jesse Eisenberg is, well, he's the same indie/ poor man's Michael Cerra that he's always played, but he's good at it, and you like him despite how little you might actually want to be stuck with him in case of a genuine zombie apocalypse.

Anyway, so I loved the movie, and, clearly, so did a lot of other people. However, here's my issue: if zombies are the new vampires, and Zombieland's success points to more zombie flicks on the horizon, it's only a matter of time before a big budget Hollywood zombie movie is made, and this would probably suck.

Now I'm not one of those "all Hollywood/ mainstream/ mass market movies suck" kinds of people. Hell, Dark Knight and Wall-E were my picks for last year's two best movies.

But, a big Hollywood budget comes with certain expectations. Like, the movie has to make as much money as it possibly can, so we have to make it appeal to as wide an audience as possible, so right away, we lose the over-the-top violence which (let's face it) is one of the best parts of a zombie movie. Zombies aren't vampires; if you stab them in the heart, you don't expect them to just disintegrate into dust. Zombies are like Monty Python's Black Knight, if you shoot off a limb, that bleeding, rotting, hideous thing just keeps coming. And we expect it to, just like we expect a human's death by carnivorous, still-moving corpses to be delightfully disgusting.

Also, in order to milk movie-goers of as much moolah as possible, a big budget Hollywood film must have so-called "stars." Now, it's purely debatable if the addition of that guy from Las Vegas and a Black former male model had anything to do with the ridiculous financial success of the Transformers movies, but the fact that they've made as much money as they have "proves" (in the half-blind eyes of Hollywood execs) that you must have someone easily recognizable to sell a film.

Now, I ask you, would Zombieland have been half as good if it starred Tom Cruise and Zac Efron? NO, IT WOULDN'T!!

Hell, I'll go one further: would more of you have automatically gone to see District 9 if it had starred that guy who plays Kenneth on 30 Rock, instead of some foreigner you'd never heard of? (If anyone answers "Yes" to that, I will hunt you down.)

Oh, and the biggest reason why a big budget/ we're aiming for mass appeal while sucking the life out of a genre about living dead things/ Hollywood zombie movie would suck? Because it might be made by Michael Bay. That guy's movies are horribly acted, too damn long, and so cliche-ridden and unoriginal that I'm convinced his scripts are written by an automatic screenplay-generator. He did his best work on the Playboy Video Centerfold of Kerri Kendall (and, in my opinion, he didn't get that great a performance out of his lead actress in that one, either).

So, Hollywood, do the whole world a favor: leave the zombie flicks with smaller budgets that they can actually make back, let me keep my deplorable violence, ignore the urge to ruin the genre with over-saturation, and keep out of Zombieland!

You'll make more money that way, and that's really all you care about in the end isn't it, you heartless, greedy bastards?