A post relating to Summer Sequels

It happens every summer. The summer movie lists come out and everybody starts to complain that it's the same films (movies I suppose) over and over. It goes like this:

Action films (they will be full of color and general connections to the current state of political affairs).

Children's films from the "lame" production companies (usually Dreamworks and whoever put out Hoodwinked and Gnomeo and Juliet).

Sequels (self-explanatory unless you're an idiot).

I'm addressing specifically sequels since this summer, movies have covered all three. Cars 2, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Final Destination 5, Conan the Barbarian 3d, Spy Kids: All the Time in the World (seriously, this is happening).

Yeah that's Jessica Alba, the kiss of death with any film but that's another post.

Every summer, everybody complains. But the complaints are never as loud as when they're lodged against sequels. And the complaints are understandable. "It's the same plot as before", "They're not even trying,", "they're just repackaging the same movie for idiots". Yeah, that's all pretty annoying but it's all bullshit because every movie is a repackage. In a way, the studios are being more honest with us when they spit out a sequel.

Instead of giving us "new" movies that are repackages, the studio is saying "Look, let's be honest. We know you don't want the same thing you had before but we also know you'll bitch like an in-house soccer team promised pizza after a game but getting a ride home instead if we try to throw a provocative, emotionally-charged film at you. But then when we do give you brilliance, you won't come and bitch all summer that you just want to enjoy yourself."

Foreign? Fuck you I've got a sunburn!

I'm as cynical as the next liberal post-ad in a shitty job. I love film and I do feel a strange fury when a friend mentions how hilarious Hangover 2 is. But I'm also not stupid.

Every person on the planet who has watched more than one movie has had the Moment. The Moment when you're watching a movie and you're moved. That doesn't mean you saw Saving Private Ryan or Naked, it just means a movie touched you in a way that nothing else has. To be honest, for me it was Royal Tenenbaums. Cliche in two ways. On one side, cliche because I'm one of those people who loves "artistic films" but can't get into "indie" public domain movies like Garden State and then on the other, a cliche because I love the public domain of "artistic films". But with all that knowledge that film, since I was fifteen, has chosen for me any other film I've seen. The only reason I haven't watched every film derivative of Royal Tenenbaums exclusively is because I started living with a film-maker who made me watch the gamut. That Moment I'm speaking of can be a stupid, fart-filled comedy or a tear jerker of a drama but it guides every selection past the Moment.

We live in a society and, as a society, we live as a group and as a group there are films that maintain huge box office gross and box gross maintains what happens to the film after it premiers. This is why we're up to number three in the Transformer series and still at one for Happy Go Lucky.

Let me break this down a little further. We all like bright colors. We all get excited by explosions. We all cry when a nice person or dog dies. We all swoon when two people who are set up as not belonging together get together. We love references to our own life in wide or tight scope. You cut all of these into a film and skirt over a human being's "bullshit sensor" and you have a winner. It doesn't need to convince you, the movie just needs to give you any decent reason to love it. Just like politics.

So let's just say, for simplicity sake, the majorities Moment is Avatar. Bright colors, the character you've fallen in love with dies, it's kind of connected to the real world. We went fucking nuts, didn't we? Most money for a film evar! This same formula, that took a bunch of giant blue people and put them in a context that vaguely related to the real world, is applied to every movie.

I give you Super 8.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpzUCA5i6zY

(BTW, the company can go fuck itself for not allowing me to embed and not allowing any images on google. If that link doesn't work just search for the fucking trailer. Asses.)

Directed by J.J. Abrams and produced by Stephen Spielberg. Who else is seeing this and not thinking "E.T.! I loved that movie when I was a kid!" or even Close Encounters. The Super 8 trailers are vague for a reason the same reason E.T. trailers are vague. And we as a populace remember and we go to see it for a little of that Moment. How about Apollo 18? A film built on the urban legend that the Apollo 18 mission did happen... and they found something. BUM BUM BUUUUUM. A little of that old feeling with a little new mixed in.

So what's my point? To put it simply, again, is EVERY film that comes out in summer, whether sequel or not, is a rehash of old films and at least sequels are the most honest of the bunch. They already got you with the first one and now they want you for the next. And the next. And the next. And the next. And the next.

Don't fake, people. You loved the first Transformer and you threw your money at the second. You were fine with taking your kids to every Spy Kids movie "for the adult humor". And, please, you like gore but not so much to make you question your own levels of squeamishness so off you go to Final Destination 5.

Complain all you want about sequels but in the end, you're just getting what you'd want anyway.

The Moment.

Josh BROLIN! I am READY Men in Black 3! Roll me.

The Death of Osama bin Laden

Well it happened. As of Sunday May 1st Osama bin Laden, the "mastermind" of 9/11 and face of Al Qaeda to the American public, is dead. Following this news was the expected gathering of American people celebrating and (in some cases) rioting in DC, at the site of 9/11 and around the country.

Also expected was the "other side" response of cynicism and disgust.

And I find myself right smack in the middle with my own opinion.

It's a familiar place. True, I do find die-hard patriotism creepy. The idea of supporting your leader no matter what they do speaks too 1984 for me. I was often infuriated by a political debate ended in the statement "you don't speak out against your president at war time". War time to me is the EXACT moment we should all have something to say negative or positive. Politics isn't religion (though the two have been disturbingly inching together over time) and I am not a heretic because I'm not in support of my leader in a time of crisis. I prefer to think of myself as having a brain.

However, while I find patriotism at times creepy, I also understand and in some moments feel that heart-swell of pride. Let's be honest, we're damn lucky to live in the country we do. It's not a utopia but the complaints we have seem childish in the face of issues inherent in the majority of other countries. And before you think I'm only speaking of middle eastern countries or third-world allow me to point out that Britain has (perhaps arguably) less tolerant ideas of racism than the US. I will still never enjoy the "Proud to Be an American" song and I don't own an American flag. But so far I don't have any plans to jump ship (we'll see after the next election).

Osama is dead. Half of the country is celebrating, the other half is lamenting how easily our country slips into a similar area as middle-eastern countries that celebrate deaths on our side. And while I agree with the latter, I also don't think it's surprising or even wrong the former reaction.

It's not because I feel the families need closure. Closure would be the end of terrorism and the death of Osama is not that. It's not because the death of a mass murderer is justified. Whether or not death for death is the right action is a difficult question one that I don't feel enlightened enough to answer.

It's because the country needed something to celebrate.

Maybe I'm the only who felt it, but there has been this increasing malaise in our public. Ten years ago one of the worst tragedies in our nation's history occurred. What followed was a knee-jerk joining together amidst mass confusion and fear. We were in mourning and clinging to the idea that we weren't strong, we HAD to be strong. We went into Afghanistan, though some of us didn't like it, and we tried to grip onto that feeling that we had to survive. We were beautiful then.

But it continued on much longer than anyone anticipated. We were in a war that wasn't a war. We began to be split. Those who were against, those who were for and those who lived everyday wondering if their loved ones would come back and only having each other to cling to because the rest of us don't understand. With enough time, the ten years overseas became a backdrop to everything. A sort of "oh yeah, that thing" for the American people. We cared and we didn't know what we cared about. We began to cling to the notion of patriotism, to supporting our troops, to protesting and, of course, to cynicism with the knowledge that none of us outside the political sphere will truly know what is going or what will happen.

Yellow ribbon magnets faded on cars, American flags frayed ever present in front of homes, special reports on the soldiers who are still leaving and sometimes coming back were smashed in between Obama news and updates on Lohan. What we were fighting for and why became less and less clear and we as a people sunk into a still proud but wary malaise.

And ten years later, a victory.

Yes, it's mostly a hollow victory. Al Qaeda still exists, our relationship with Pakistan is shaky at best and there is an increased threat of a homeland terrorist attack in retaliation.

But for now, we have a visceral success and it brings the country out of it's collective funk then I can handle a few too many riots and flag-waving celebrations for my taste.

Rebecca Black: The Most Hated Girl on Youtube... currently

I was recently introduced to music video Friday by Rebecca Black. Apparently, in our social network world, I'm the last person to hear it. And it would have been fine to never hear it.

Exhibit A. A... pop star?



Personally, I hate the song and the video. I hate how it was produced. I hate its history and the company's mission.

But I don't hate a 13 year-old girl.

Here's the backstory for anyone who hasn't checked wikipedia. Ark Music Factory is a Los Angeles vanity record label ("vanity record label" meaning a record company that produces content at the "artist's" expense rather than the other way around). Ark centers it's work around on the "recruitment/discovery of new young singers" according to the wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ark_Music_Factory) though the website itself gives no information other than offers of following them on every popular social networking site that currently exists and neon tweets for Rebecca Black and their other clients. The basic idea is the company has prewritten songs an "artist" can choose from then they produce a professionalish music video. What's not mentioned on the site is the cost, only contact info and more 90's myspace graphics. You know they have to be charging the clients. They're a vanity record label, it's the definition of any vanity company to charge the client.

Now here's where things get really shady. Yesterday I checked the wikipedia page on Rebecca Black and found quotes from her mother and a reference to $2000 paid for her video. And now it's gone along with the "about" section of the Ark website. I have no evidence but what it looks like is, with all the backlash against Rebecca Black and the company itself, they are working to wipe clean any trace of payment for the video and other videos they've produced. Otherwise, it'd give credence to the current permeating idea that Rebecca Black and the rest of the child clients are NOT artists, are NOT musicians and should NOT be allowed to skip over the hard work and years of training other singers go through to get to the same point.

And that idea is right. Kids with rich parents (especially kids with no stage presence and the talent of your little sister singing into a hairbrush) shouldn't be allowed to have money thrown into the pot and a career pop out. It's an insult to art and an insult to the rest of us who have to take out licks playing for free in cafe's where the only attendants are their friends they had to remind daily to show up (half of who didn't come anyway).

But the other poptarts in the genre throwing their two cents in really have no leg to stand on and Rebecca Black doesn't deserve to be treated like the Yoko of pop music.

Take for example this tidbit from Ms. Miley Cyrus.

"It should be harder to be an artist," Cyrus, 18, told Australia's Daily Telegraph of the 13-year-old Internet sensation. "You shouldn't just be able to put a song on YouTube and go on tour." (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42342379/ns/today-entertainment/)

Really Miley? But they should be able to have their daddy pull some strings to get them a network tv show with DISNEY? A show whose main character just happens to lead a double life as a pop-star? Is that how PJ Harvey got her start?

And I can think of another youtube star Miley doesn't seem to have any problem with.



Does this lesbiImean little boy look familiar. Yeah that's Justin Bieber seen with Miley Cyrus supposedly after dinner where they discussed a "side-project". (http://www.usmagazine.com/healthylifestyle/news/miley-cyrus-and-justin-bieber-go-on-dinner-date-2010115)

I wonder if the side-project was Miley teaching him the ins and outs of being a true artist?

So much of the backlash is completely hypocritical. If you break down the issues it comes down to:

"She bought her way in"

Well, that is infuriating. Being lower middle-class myself, of course it pisses me off personally but, for God's sake, she's thirteen! Her parents gave her an option and she went for it. Who wouldn't and how many pop stars haven't done it (I've already given you one, you can probably make a two page list in ten minutes)?

"She's a product"

Allow me to introduce you to American Idol and the Disney corporation. Ever seen the "dance breaks" between Disney shows? Terrifying.

HERE'S ONE!



"The song's TERRIBLE"

Sample lyrics from pop artists who don't have comment sections entirely of death threats and virtual spits in the face.

Kei$ha "Tik Tok": Don't stop/ make it pop/ DJ blow my speakers up/ tonight I'mma fight/ til we see the sunlight/

Britney Spears "Womanizer": Lollipop must mistake me you're the sucker/ to think I would be a victim not another/ say it play it how you want it/ but no way I'm never gonna fall for you never you baby

Justin Bieber "Baby": you know you love me I know you care/ just shout whenever and I'll be there/ you are my love you are my heart/ and we will never ever be apart

Miley Cyrus "Party in the USA": my tummy's turnin' and I'm feelin' kinda homesick/ too much pressure and I'm nervous/ that's when the DJ dropped my favorite tune

Sorry guys, it's all terrible. It all either reads like shitty middle-school poetry or lazy anthems to how hard white girls party at da club.

Look, pop music has NEVER been high art. As much respect as people have for Madonna, I don't know a single person who can say honestly and with a straight face that her music really changed their perspective on life. Pop music is meant to be fun, even the super duper sad pants songs. And that's what this kid did, she had fun.

And of course... here's her fucking video.



Psych! I love that dog.

Walmart: The Hell Beast of Consumerism

I hate Walmart. I really do. The store is creepy, it shoehorns itself into small communities and destroys smaller businesses absorbing like Akira on a highway. Remember when your girlfriend was squished between mechanical flesh? It was WALMART.



Walmart has also been in news NUMEROUS times for employee abuse such as women receiving fewer raises and promotions than men. These complaints are here http://walmartwatch.com/ for your internetting pleasure.

But there's this thing about Walmart and really any giant corporation. It didn't just appear out of the depths of hell and gain power through the tears of orphans. It's what is known in the business world as a SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS. A successful business can be simply described as a business that offers a product that consumers are willing to continuously buy. This is a hint to one of my points in this post.

Walmart was founded in 1972 by Sam Walton who graduated from the University of Missouri in Columbia and, after working for JC Penny out of college, in 1944 acquired the lease and franchise on Ben Franklin a variety store. By 1948, Sam had increased the revenue from $80,000 to $225,000 which is the difference between a Jaguar 2010 XFR and a McLaren MP4-12C.


This...


To this!
Yeah I barely know the difference either but it's a lot of money.

Come 1950, the landlord declined to the renew the lease forcing Sam to purchase a five and dime in Siloam Arkansas which would become the headquarters of the eventual super store. Between the 1960's and 70's, Sam hit on a great idea to achieve higher sales while keeping prices lower than competitors by reducing his profit margin. What's profit margin? Go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profit_margin. Anyway, by 1962 Sam had opened eleven more stores then, inspired by other discount retailers, opened his first Wal-Mart. By 1967, Sam had 24 stores across Arkansas and reached $12.6 million in sales and by 1968 opened it's first stores outside of Arkansas in Missouri and Oklahoma.

To recap, Sam in 1944 owned a Ben Franklin and 23 years later was generating $12.6 million in sales.

By 1975 Walmart (having now been traded and rechristened without the dash) was now in 9 states with 125 stores, 7,500 associates and was now generating $340.3 million. In 8 years. In 1977, Walmart made it's first corporate acquisition in Mohr Value stores and Hutcheson Shoe company. 1978, Walmart adds a pharmacy, auto servicing and jewelry departments.

By 1979, Walmart had 276 stores, 21,000 associates and had reached $1.248 BILLION in sales. In five years Walmart had reached the "B" word. For reference the national debt of the US in 1979 was $640.3 billion. I know, it's $600 billion more than Walmart BUT THEY'RE BOTH IN BILLIONS!

By 1985 there were 882 stores, 104,000 associates and was now generating $8.4 billion in revenue. Now is where we get into the nitty gritty. 1988, Sam stepped down as Chief Executive and the Walmart Supercenter was opened in Washington MIssouri which now included everything you'd come to expect from good old-fashioned Walmart PLUS a tire and oil change shop, optical center, one-hour photo processing lab, portrait studio and, depending on the store, banks, cellular telephone stores, hair and nail salons, video rental and various fast food outlets.


And they increased their produce!

Let's skip ahead in history where Walmart enters more states and quadruples it's revenue to $32 billion to March 17th, 1992 when President Bush SR presents Sam Walton with the Presidential Medal of Freedom the highest civilian medal of honor for civilians who have made "an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural or other significant public or private endeavors". April 5th, 1992, Sam Walton dies of future irony. Or old age. Whatever, in 1992 he's dead with a medal for being awesome in business or something.


America... eatin' my lunch from a single bowl...

Let's skip ahead again to 2005 (because even I'm getting bored) had a whopping $312.4 BILLION IN SALES. That's now HALF the national debt from 1979 (but not even touching the current national debt thanks to Bush's retarded son FUTURE IRONY).

So what's the point of this long-winded history of Walmart? That it didn't pop up overnight. It was continuous consumers that built the corporation to the force it is today. And I know what you vegan, in home chefs, composting, fighting the corporation, hipster, urbanites and general AWARES will say... "That's why I don't shop at Walmart". The second point of that long winded history is Walmart is successful not because we're all idiots who can resist the fluorescent charms of the over AC'd warehouse.

Walmart DOES offer the lowest prices. It's what sent the business rocketing to Presidential Medal glory.

Imagine you need film and you're a college student who didn't have school paid for by their parents and does have to work to make rent. Imagine you need film. There's a cute shop down the street where the film is $20 a roll and Walmart in town where it's $10 a roll. Really put yourself in this scene. All you've eaten this week is Ramen. You've had to work a double and you have to midterms and a project due the next morning. You just need two photos but you're out of film and on you're last $20 for the week. And it's Tuesday. Where are you going?

If you say the cute shop you're a fucking liar, you're going to Walmart and you're lying to your friends about it you ASSHOLE.

Walmart is not the disease. It's the symptom. Walmart sprang up as money for families was dwindling. Remember how I kept bringing up the national debt? Check this out: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-debt-of-the-united-states.htm
That's a site chronicling our national debt and there are a few jumps that coincide with Walmarts business success.

Simply, we're getting poorer even if we don't notice it and Walmart has deep enough roots to survive even if it does take a hit in revenue. It's always there with low prices as the "I'm fucked" option. With a national debt like that, you can't really blame people for going for the cheaper option.

And besides that, while Walmart is awful to it's employees there is something good it does. Walmart is the highest employer of the disabled and elderly in the United States. Now, that's a little inflated seeing as Walmart is the biggest corporation in the US of course it would have the highest numbers of really anything. But still, 80 years old? Run the register! Paralyzed in Vietnam? You can be a greeter! Lost half your face to leprosy? You can stock between the hours of 12am and 8! Many other businesses would consider these people to be a liability whether it's fair or not. But Walmart, having the money it does, doesn't know the meaning of the word "liability". It died with Sam Walton. And, well, in this case that's great! The handicapped and elderly need and want jobs too.


Part 1 at the end starts my point.


Oh Henry Rollins

So, yes, Walmart is terrible in it's current form. But it started as a good idea and has become a symptom of the economic disease in our country. While offering what struggling people need it destroys entire small communities and abuses it employees. But if someone has a better idea or a way for even the poorest mother on Welfare to support herself I suggest get on it or shut the fuck up.

Christianity: Oh No I Went There

Ah Christianity. Is there any other belief system that permeates almost every aspect of American life whether you're Christian or not? It's in politics, TV, film, books, music, clothing, housing. How many of us have spoken irritatedly in small groups of like minds about the ridiculousness of Sarah Palin or the still raging Under God debate? I know I have.

Let's be honest. There are quite a few Christian groups who go beyond searching for acceptance and spreading the lord's work with incredibly dividing tactics such as bombing clinics (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-07-17-rudolph-monday-sentencing_x.htm), threatening death on public officials (http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/06/father-and-son-arrested-for-threatening-to-kill-stupak-over-health-care.php?ref=fpblg) and stepping out in the public eye to denounce other minority groups or religions as disgusting and wrong (http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=ARTICLES&id=1108002726).

And to me, any attempt to circumvent or fight Separation of Church and State is hypocritical and a waste of time considering all the real problems there are in the US. Seriously, while people are being thrown out of their homes and cancer rates are rising, these Christian groups are more interested in pouring money into fighting their "lost right" to pray in church. YOU CAN PRAY ALL YOU FUCKING WANT. It only becomes insulting to demand through laws that everyone else pray with you.


Under God was added to the pledge in the 1950's by the way.

The list of issues with Christians is a long one.

Hell Houses. Haunted Houses run by Christian groups who replace your dad in his robe and white paint as the grim reapers with hell-worthy scenes of abortion, raves and homosexuality.

Pat Robertson. If only those Haitians hadn't made a pact with the devil.

Napoleon the Third... or whatever.

The Phelps Family: Need I say more?


Well maybe just, no, that's not what anal sex feels like.

Pentacostal summer camps familiar to doc lovers as Jesus Camp (http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/). Camps that alternate between seminars about the evils of abortion with fun fetus action figures and breaking small children to tears for being "liars" in their faith.

But before you think this entire entry is my chance to shit all over Christianity allow me to point out the striking similarity in my small list above.

That's not Christianity... those are PEOPLE.

Nowhere in the Bible (as far as I've read granted I've only gotten to the part where Soylent Green is people) does it give directions for creating Hell Houses, running an abusive summer camp for children or disrupting funerals to protest whatevers up their ass that week nor does it have Haiti on the short list of countries that made a pact with the devil.


Although Detroit is.

Christianity cannot be strictly defined having many different interpretations being classified as an Abrahamic religion along with Islam and Judaism with the origins found in Judaism around the first and second millennium BCE during which the Hebrew bible was formed. 1,500 years later Christianity was formed following the original peace loving hippie Jesus Christ and his nailing to the cross/resurrection act (don't be offended, if you can't laugh you're dead). Come the 7th century, Islam was founded by Mohammed on the teachings of the Quran (handed down orally from Allah through the angel Jibr'il (which can be translated as Gabriel) which refers to Moses and David (who are old school) and also Jesus. For 1,300 years Judaism, Islam and Christianity were thought to be intertwined by similar histories and thought.

Here's a handy dandy timeline for the confused: http://chaos1.hypermart.net/fullsize/wrwestfs.gif

The difference came to INTERPRETATION.

Now I'm not interested (at least, not right now) in pointing out the slight amount of irony in the continuous fire fight between those three religions who all have the same idea and have shared quite a bit of bloodshed over those same ideas in our lifetime alone. But isn't it interesting nonetheless?

Christianity began with a general concept. God on high, Jesus is his son and man's messiah (prophesied in the Hebrew bible), Jesus died for our sins and taught love for our fellow man.

You know what Jesus didn't teach (at least according to the bible)? DAMNATION.

The bible is broken in two parts. Old Testament when God was sick of his kids wrecking the house every time he left for work so he tried tough love of hell fire, natural disasters and on one drunken bet (with his former dude now fallen angel douche Satan) tormenting one of his strongest followers, Job, by killing his family, taking his home and covering his worshipping ass in disease.


God also forced Job to see into the future of Christianity.

But that was old testament, man. Then came the New Testament following Jesus Christ who teachings are basically (and I say basically because I'm interpreting gospels written two thousand years ago) compassion and forgiveness.

http://www.gospel-mysteries.net/teachings-jesus.html

Now, the gospels can be and have been interpreted many different ways though the basic idea stays the same. Sometimes it's interpreted as extreme morality, sometimes as Utopian ideals and sometimes as a general map to salvation (do your best but try not to fuck anyone up). NOWHERE have I found Jesus screaming in his underwear "FOLLOW OR BE DAMNED MEDAMMIT!" It wouldn't make sense if he did. Have compassion and if you don't enjoy an eternity of torture? I'll feel sorry for you?

I mean, technically, hell has been interpreted as "grave". As in Jesus has also been sent to "hell" (Acts 2:31 KJV) before he was resurrected.

So where are these Christians coming from? It's really simple. It's called ignorance. These are Christians who have listened to each other and made their own conclusions rather than referring back to the text they laud.

Christianity has been abused so rampantly that's it's become more weapon than belief. A trigger button on a gun made of fear and stupidity wielded when all other logic has failed (despite the astounding amount of history and logic there actually IS to Christianity).

Besides, according to the Bible, if there even IS a hell then it is a fallacy that God could condemn his people to hell seeing as God is love John4:8. But beyond that only fucking GOD can condemn a sinner to Hell. Drop that paradox down the next time a Southern Baptist minister screams in your face.

My final point is such. There are over 2.2 BILLION Christians in the world. Now out of 2.2 billion a couple thousand are running around reinterpreting the religion to their needs. Really, in the scope of things, that's like saying your house party with 30 people was a bust because one drunk frat guy called your boyfriend a pussy and puked in your menses pot.

So true Christians, wear your crosses high on the neck and pray as hard as you can. You've got a lot of loud-mouthed assholes to cover up.


Go Christian GO!

Avatar: Bullshit in Blue

Unless you live on Pandora, you've heard of this "environmental" film called Avatar. And if you do live on Pandora you should be aware that the director of Aliens and Titanic has made a film about your happy peace loving planet turning all of you into a bunch of hot stereotypical minorities ala Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves.

There is a lot wrong with Avatar which every friend of a hip film lover and former film major in the country has heard and doesn't fucking care LET ME ENJOY A MOVIE! It's lazy character development and design. It's set in the future yet the american military seems to have advanced any further than our genocidal past. It focuses on amazing visuals rather than a strong plot as would be expected from James Camerons near constant self back patting about his environmental film.

Look at him... saving the environment and lookin' good while he does all blue and... blue.


We're supposed to be touched by his plea to respect beautiful things before we lose them but the message from environmentalists is rarely just Save the Pretty Tiger. It's usually save the planet. The whole planet. We already want to save flowers and tigers, it's other areas like dirt, amphibians and fucking AIR that's still at the top of the Stop Poisoning This list. But I digress.

I mean look at how pretty that is! It's like if the ocean had sex with the best dog and had mutant ocean cute kitten babies!


Avatar is bullshit BUT it is successful bullshit. And yes that is half brilliant marketing and half incredible visuals and that is sad. BUT this has opened the door. We all know to cram the hippie message of save the world you have to cover it with enough icing to crack a smile on any down-home doin it for the little people politician. If a geeky twenty-something walks up to a fifty-year old stocker at Walmart just getting off the graveyard shift and says "You know, fossil fuels won't last forever and gas is never getting cheaper so why don't you hop out of your Ford diesel and into this Prius" he'll probably wake up on a trash barge heading to garbage island. But if a beautiful sexy woman walks up to the same guy and says "Tigers make me feel sexy but they're endangered and it won't get any better until we find alternative fuel" Lacking logic in the statement or not, the guy will jump into that Prius. For the tigers. Those sexy sexy tigers.

My point is, with everything going on in the average American's life, debt, kids, shitty jobs, hearing that they need to turn their whole life around from some dirt is not going to fly. Unless it looks inviting, beautiful and fucking AWESOME. Ah the trick of marketing. If slugs had the PR team Avatar did, banana slugs would be the it pet of the year. So fuck you Puggle.

Sorry puppy, a slug fits better in my purse next to my eye shadow and tampons.


But aside from the tacked on environmental message the technology used in Avatar are leaps in visual communication. In a year of every movie coming out in 3D, Avatar is the only one that used and created technology that when utilized in more interesting ways could create some interesting pieces of art in the future. The thing about 3D is not every movie is necessarily even when it says it is. There are two ways to create 3D. First way, you shoot the movie second person like we're all familiar with then add some lenses and editing and... look I don't know the specific technology just wikipedia it. The second way is using an actual 3D camera. That's why some 3D films look and feel strange and usually give you headache and others fit your eyeballs in a much more pleasing natural way. Avatar is it's own animal. And while it is depressing the idea that droves of people would still only show up to a film for the "experience" which is equivalent to showing a newborn the pictures in a storybook, we can't expect the first of it's kind to be a sort of 3D Godfather. If we go back in time, the first color picture (shot in color not had color added later) was a A Visit to the Seaside released 1908. Remember that film? Yeah I just looked it up too. Rotoscoping (drawing over live action like in Titan AE, Waking Life and A Scanner Darkly) was invented in 1915 to animate the directors friend in a clown suit for Out of the Inkwell and again to animate, wait for it, Betty Boop.

Here's Betty Boop one of the first famous rotoscoped ladies.


And Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder, two ladies in later rotoscoping.


And for good measure here's Out of the Inkwell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tszUgxP9kog

Both color film and rotoscoping began and continued in small projects without the gain of narrative prowess but were harnessed later to add a visual truth to a strong plot. To put it simply, fun tool created just to be seen used later to create atmosphere.

So Avatar is bullshit and a proud of example of the power of money. But, if it did anything wonderful, it opened two doors. Talking about the environment in a forum that doesn't require a Mate tea and a big chip on the shoulder and a technology advancement that really could advance a media further than it's gone in decades.

Family Guy

I'm an animation lover and lately I've been focusing on primetime cartoons as they have the most familiarity and exposure. These cartoons are generally the Fox line-up Family Guy, Simpsons, American Dad and The Cleveland Show. Today I'm focusing on Family Guy.

Now I'm a huge Family Guy detractor. I find it lazy animation and a great example of how one popular show can poison everything around it.





And...



And of course....



Genius.

Once Family Guy found huge success (after two cancellations) King of the Hill found itself cancelled and The Simpsons, the animated real life on TV pioneer, suddenly began combating becoming stale with similar cut away jokes and incongruous plots.

But I like Seth MacFarlane and have always had a theory that the current Family Guy format is not where he first imagined the show going. While being a detractor, I've also seen every episode and own seasons 1 through 5 (although I only bought 1 through 3... damn family at Christmas not knowing what I'm into or asking and buying me the same thing every year because "You love Family Man!"). Seasons 1 through 3, while having the cutaway jokes and random humor, still had pretty solid plots and at some points reached some poignant moments. Like the episode where Brian becomes a caretaker for a shut-in and finds the beauty inside her juxtaposed with Peter coming to terms with taking care and letting go of three baby birds nesting in his beard. It's not brilliant but neither were the first two seasons of the Simpsons and like the Simpsons it seemed to be heading to something interesting.

Then Family Guy was cancelled.

Fox has a rule. If a show isn't insanely popular in five minutes, it will be canceled no matter the quality. Ask Firefly for more information on that. But Fox is also fickle and after the first cancellation, they brought Family Guy back to finish their third season moving the show around to random time slots and then eventually putting it up against Survivor and Friends. If anyone remembers the early 2000's and the Survivor craze (is that show still on?), they'll know that Fox basically put a death sentence on Family Guy and, just before the third season, announced it's official cancellation. But, due to high DVD sales, Fox brought back Family Guy in it's current form. It's hard for me to imagine that after two cancellations and Fox shifting the show around like a kid poking at a dead skunk on the side of a hot road, Seth MacFarlane thinking this was a good time to experiment with the format of his first show as they were attempting in the first three seasons. What's the safest thing you can do with a cartoon in primetime? Make sure it appeals to the lowest denominator. Make it funny in a way that both people will remember (thus they'll watch again) and have jokes simple enough for a drunk and stoned twenty-year old to understand (no heavy shit, fart jokes and funny hats please).

If this is what happened (and obviously I'm not MacFarlane's buddy, this is just a theory) then it explains why the show shifted from episodes about Chris trying to bond with his father Peter to episodes that start at Stewie's play and end with Peter being sexually harassed by his boss.

Tonight I watched the 150th episode. You know what? I think I might have been right. In ten years, NEVER have I seen an episode like this come out of Family Guy. No cutaways, the plot didn't bounce around to the easiest joke and it was lovely in places. Almost heart-wrenching.

Stewie and Brian are locked in a bank vault together and spend the episode... mostly talking. There's toilet humor of course but it doesn't stand alone and actually helps build the plot to a climax. Seth MacFarlane has before stated that Brian's character is based at least partially on his own personality (hence why Brian is one the most developed characters on Family Guy) and the dynamic of Stewie and Brian has resulted in the best episodes of the series before. But this episode almost screamed to me "I CAN WRITE!"

Seth MacFarlane has gotten a lot of flack for Family Guy before. Even John Kricfalusi, creator of Ren and Stimpy, has come out of the woodwork for Family Guy's blood stating "If you’re a kid wanting to be a cartoonist today, and you’re looking at FAMILY GUY, you don’t have to aim very high. You can draw FAMILY GUY when you’re ten years old. You don’t have to get any better than that to become a professional cartoonist. The standards are extremely low." http://www.cartoonbrew.com/old-brew/the-john-kricfalusi-interview-part-2.html. And of course, everyone's aware of Trey Parker and Matt Stone's opinion (see Cartoon Wars part 1 and 2 if you're lost). But I think this is simply a case of a man seeing where the money is and going for it.

Now I'm talking a lot about Seth Macfarlane as he is the creator therefore the house should come down on him just like with the awful new episodes of Simpsons I still put blame on Matt Groening even though he's barely involved anymore. But the thing is, Seth didn't write Brian and Stewie, the 150th episode holding the most redeeming qualities of the show. That credit goes to Gary Janetti (whose only written two other episodes technically) and Dominic Bianchi the director. I looked up the other episodes they worked on and... didn't find any of the episodes that spoke to me. It looks like the whole FG crew is following the rule of successful animation on Fox. Lowest common denominator. If you're going to be offensive, just be as offensive as you can be. That way, only the Parents Television Council (glorified PTA) and religious nuts will be offended and no one really cares what they think anyway. Seriously. The Parents Television Council? When have we ever needed that? Instead of creating a group to monitor television why don't they just watch their fucking kids?

The point:

Seth Macfarlane is not an asshole who's out to destroy the credibility of animation. He had an idea that he turned into a VERY successful venture. The man, with more than half of the animation on Fox being his creation, is the highest paid writer in television... EVER.

This man.


While that puts a twitch in my eye (loving the Wire and Southpark as I do) I'm also poor and if I had the option he had, even with my rantings and standards, I'd fucking take it too. It's almost a meta joke. If Brian and Stewie becomes a popular episode I think we could see a slow change to form or at least more interesting developments from Seth Macfarlane. Or maybe we'll break even and The Cleveland Show will finally get canceled for the racist poorly written abortion it is.