The Last Place on Earth

Testing, Testing...

2008-09-15T00:59:00.002-04:00

...is this thing on?

So, yeah, on a whim (and, um, "whim" is a terrible euphemism for "feeling the same sort of lonely I used to feel when I contributed to this blog more frequently") I typed in this URL and started getting nostalgic.

I got about three sentences into my last post, and I noticed something.

I used the phrase "brass tax."

I fail.

The proper phrase is "brass tacks."

The origin of "Getting down to brass tacks" is a little fuzzy, or so the idiom-gods at wikipedia say, but regardless, the phrase is NOT "brass tax."

Yes. I'm a spaz.

And oh yeah, I'm 30 now, and while I didn't think guys had biological clocks; I'm starting to get the feeling that I should start looking for someone to spend the rest of my life with.

Um... I'm 6'2", not horribly ugly, smart, talented, funny, sensitive, creative, a good cook, a hopeless romantic, a pop- and geek-culture reference fun-factory, and I REALLY want to make someone very very happy for the rest of her (and my) life.

Interest in, or tolerance of, World of Warcraft a big plus. :)

Thanksgiving in June, The Next Jennie Finch, and How Trailer Trash is Unconsciously Supporting Gay Marraige

2006-06-06T01:41:00.000-04:00

When you're a white guy who grew up in a town full of rich white people, and more importantly, when you're keenly aware that you're a white guy who grew up in a town full of rich white people, well, occasionally there's a bit of self-reflection that should go on.

(Strictly considering the situation in a "brass tax" sort of way, I should realize that I've hit the geographical lottery. The town where I grew up is in, say, the #5 richest county in the US based on per capita income.)

So what goes on in this aforementioned self-reflection? Well, besides hating myself and blaming my lack of focus/ambition for squandering both my fortunate upbringing and intelligence since I haven't yet become famous or rich... what really goes on is I have to center myself.

Aside: Now, I said "fortunate upbringing." I'm not saying I grew up rich, because I didn't. But then again, there's that centering thing. I don't think I was rich, because I knew kids that lived in neighborhoods with white fences, speed bumps, and security booths. I knew kids with live-in "help," (a.k.a. servants) tennis courts, and swimming pools. I wasn't friends with any kids that had "family chefs" or took the private jet to Chicago to see the Tyson fight... but they were there and I knew them; and they often had a last name that could be found on the NYSE somewhere. To those kids, the idea of doing household labor yourself was just silly. I've mowed too many lawns, shoveled too much snow, painted too many rooms, and lifted too many heavy objects to really see things how they saw things. BUT, I have to remind myself that I got a lot of things that other kids couldn't have, and I didn't have to get a job during high school to help my family cover expenses; I got a job because I wanted more stupid shit to play with.

And, well, I'm honestly glad that my parents didn't push me to "be all I could be." They made it clear that they were proud of me when I achieved something, (and disappointed when I slacked off,); they wanted to make sure that it was ME that wanted to strive for greatness.

That gets me to the first major point I want to make with this post.

I have a buddy, who had a girlfriend, who has a younger sister. The ex of my buddy is away at college most of the time, but the younger sister is a senior in high school. Now, it's a weird situation for sure, but the younger sister often hangs out with the same group as me and my friends. This group of friends that hangs out when she comes by is pretty diverse, so it's not like it's all me and my late 20something friends and this 18 year old; there are younger folks around, but she is the youngest.

So why am I talking about this girl? Well, because you might see her on ESPN someday. She plays softball (and basketball), and she's REALLY good. Besides all the crap like how she's always in the papers and she hits leadoff and plays center field for her High School which is like 30-2 or something silly like that, and how she's getting all these scholarship offers and accolades, there was one thing that really made me go, "wow."

A bunch of us were putzing around on a softball field last summer, and this girl was with us, and after we had all taken our hacks, she, well... she did... okay.. you remember this commercial?

Yeah, so, she did THAT. With a softball and a bat. And yes, she even smashed the bejesus out of it at the end.

Now, I have to be realistic for a second. It's also important to note that besides being exceptionally gifted athletically, she's also: 1) smart, 2) socially well adjusted, and 3) attractive. I hate to say it, but to be "big" in sports as a member of the softer sex, you have to be attractive. This isn't a sexist statement, this isn't verbal diarrea from a pig-headed schovanist; this is the reality of women's sports as they are right now. It sucks; but it's true. This is why I think she can really "make it."

The sports-watching public isn't ready to revere female athletes based soley on their athletic prowess. Does it help to be really really good? Yes, of course it does. Do you have to be the best to be the most famous or rich? No, no you don't.

This is why Anna Kournicova makes a LOT more money than all the players who are better than her. (and there are a lot of players better than her) This is why Maria Sharapova was vaulted to instant superstardom when players like Lindsay Davenport and Kim Clijsters, (who are attractive, but not supermodels-with-rackets) who have won more titles, are left behind.

This is why the US thought they could launch a women's soccer league after we fell in love with the photogenic World Cup team of Mia Hamm, Brandi Chastain, Julie Fowdy, etc; by putting one of them on each team to be the figureheads.

This is why the US Olympic Softball team got so much attention; not because they were great and won gold, but because of Jennie Finch, and the fact that she was cute and made a good story for the Olympics.

This is also why the WNBA carefully markets good looking players in traditional gender roles, and they downplay the fact that a significant portion of their players are lesbian, and an equally large portion of their fans are lesbian. (And you don't have to take my word for it, here's an article written by Sheryl Swoopes for ESPN.com)

Okay, anyways, off the soapbox for a second. So this girl is amazing, right? Well, now, in her senior year, when she's being picked for first-team all-everything, and getting scholarship offers out the wazoo, she's starting to realize, maybe she doesn't want to play anymore. I haven't talked to her one-on-one, but she's made it clear to some people that she's not enjoying it as much anymore, and everyone I've talked to are incredulous about how she could consider squandering her talent.

Well, maybe she just wants to be happy. And maybe she's not happy being her town's poster child for women's athletics anymore. When I see her next, I'm going to gently let her know that I think that whatever's getting to her, she should do what she knows deep down will make her happy. I think that everyone has an internal tacit knowledge of how much they really care about something. Only she knows if she'll regret it if she gives it up; only she knows if she can handle the attention and the pressure if she goes all out with it. She needs to ask herself what her dream is. If, when she closes her eyes, she sees herself playing softball and being happy, then she knows that she can make that happen and it's worth the hardship and pressures that come with it.

Now, somewhere in there I touched on the second major point I wanted to make. (And this gets back to the whole centering thing.) Being whitebread in richville, there isn't a whole lot of diversity, but there's plenty of education.

So, what this boils down to, is that there's a lot of acceptance, but there isn't all that much understanding.

I can easily accept anyone who's not like me. I don't care if you're gay, you have a skin color that's not like mine, or whatever.

But I'm not sure I can always understand. I've only had two friends that were gay, and one of them turned out to be, well, more than gay.

Aside: I think I touched on it once before in an earlier post, but this was the guy that ended up being caught in a police sting as a sexual predator going after young boys on the internet. All I can say is, when they say that they "never would've thought it was him, but after thinking about it, it kind of makes sense," well, they're right.

The other friend I've had that was gay, well, he's the only gay guy I've ever really felt I understood. The fact that he was gay was such an afterthought, and I could spend an entire evening hanging out with him and never once would the thought that he's gay cross my mind.

I use the term "understand" because I really think that's what it is. For me, at least, if I don't get how someone ticks, I have trouble making meaningful connections with them. With this guy; we first of all had other common ground (theater), and secondly, he was just so matter-of-fact about everything, him and all the things about him that were different from me just seemed so.. (and I hate to use this word) "normal."

I guess you could say that I just "got" him; and because of that, the mental obstacle had been cleared and I could easily move on with being his friend.

It's too bad that since my theater company imploded, we don't talk or see each other much anymore; I really think he made me a better person.

By the way, not to open another can of worms, but it's my opinion that there shouldn't even be a debate on gay marraige. I know that this is a statement with little thought behind it and 3rd Grade language; but the people standing against gay marraige are retards. Okay, now let me try and lend some intelligence to that.

I've heard the argument about the "sanctity of marraige" and the "institution of marraige" being changed or marred, and all I have to do in response to that is just point a few simple facts.

More people get divorced now than stay married. It just isn't regarded anymore as a "sacred" and "unbreakable" bond, like it was intended to be. All you have to do is take a visit to Vegas, or watch daytime TV. (And the Soaps and Talk Shows are just as good as the Judge Whosiwhatsit shows at illustrating this point..) How sacred does marraige look there?

Now, I know what some of the gay-marraige protesters might say; they think that those people are wrong too.

But let me hit them upside the head with this. Do they REALLY think that gay folks are going to treat marraige with as much, or more, distain than the trailer trash on daytime TV? And, furthermore, why weren't these protesters out of the woodwork, beating brows and thumping bibles BEFORE gay marraige was brought to the table?

Please. I'll take the over-under on gay couples respecting marraige more than straight couples as a whole anyday. Anyone who's willing to jump through the hoops and endure the scrutiny required to be married as a gay couple, isn't going to take that bond lightly.

There is only ONE argument that I feel has any credence in this arena, and it's the same argument that I have to concede for mixed-race couples as well; and that has to do with the kids. No one wants their children to have to endure suffering or get made of by their peers.

BUT, how else will things change? I'm more progressive than my parents, for sure, but I don't necessarily have them to thank for it. I have to thank braver people who DID endure that suffering in order to offer me and countless others the opportunity to choose the right path of acceptance over prejudice and fear. Did everyone choose the right path? Certainly not. But the people who are brave enough to show to the world some life choices that aren't the status quo, and how they aren't "different" after all, are the proverbial heroes of the war on prejudice. There should be an equivalent of a purple heart (the medal awarded to a soldier who is injured in battle) for those who put up with ignorance and prejudice; and furthermore, bring children into this world that represent progress in that struggle.

The "Training" version is for another post...

2006-05-05T15:48:00.000-04:00

It's already been established that I'm an emotional sucker. Besides that which is SO cheesy that it's unintentionally funny, moving scenes in TV and movies drive me to lower lip tremblage pretty easily, especially for a heterosexual male, who are supposedly impervious to emotion unless it has to do with sports or one's favorite dog named Duke; and even then, we have to hide it. (Seriously, any guy who doesn't get misty-eyed at Rudy is probably a mandroid.)

Few of said moving scenes, um, move, me more than the musical montage. I'm not picky, I love them all, but I have to admit that The Shield produces some seriously kickass montages, and they're probably my favorite. (Though its sister show, Rescue Me, isn't too shabby either; and The Sopranos did it well before either of them. And then there's the reality show montage, and it's equally hard to beat the Survivor montage that they do every season when the final three are on their way to the last immunity challenge, when they walk a path lined with the torches of all the people that have been voted off before them.)

What really turns me on about musical montages is the ability to tell a story using only visuals, while letting the music take over the aural spectrum. It allows the actors to stretch their non-verbal communication skills; to let their emotions on their face and their body language replace their lines. It also forces the writers and the director to use visuals as exposition instead of lines for explanation. Having an actor find a photo in a box, or see something or someone from afar, is a much more powerful way of showing the audience a new piece of information than having someone say it. Shows do this all the time, but the montage forces many of these moments back-to-back. I dunno why, but everything just seems so much more powerful when only the music comes through.

Now, you might be wondering what real-life event inspired me to write this post. What show did I watch recently that had such a great musical montage?

Well, honestly... I didn't see a montage to inspire this. I heard a song.

I heard a song, and I immediately wanted a montage to go with it. This has happened a couple of times to me; this time it was INXS's "Afterglow."

(Cheesy? Yeah, maybe... but at least it wasn't as bad as the last song that did this to me... that silly DHT techno remake of Roxette's "Listen to your Heart." I kept wanting to see a montage of someone realizing how foolish they were for letting something get in between him and someone he loved; then turning around and frantically racing back to them to make things right.)

Unfortunately, that Google music video I linked to doesn't scratch the montage itch for me. And I wonder why? (And no, it wasn't because the model playing the afterglow-worthy love interest was a little too modely and Frenchy for me.)

I think I know. I think it's because I don't know anything about what's going on in the video. I think part of what makes a montage so great is the fact that you have all the artistry and powerful visuals of a music video, but you have context to go with it. You've been watching the show, so you know what's going through everyone's head as you see them in the montage; you know why they're crying, laughing, frustrated or angry, plotting for revenge or wallowing in their own self-hatred.

Now, I guess the question is, why do some songs do this to me when other, seemingly indistinguishable-in-quality songs, don't? For instance, why does the INXS song immediately make me want a powerful montage to go with it, while James Blunt's "You're Beautiful," which I also really like, doesn't?

I Heart Farscape, Part Two: How Giant Robots have nothing to do with Farscape.

2006-04-19T13:07:00.000-04:00

Perhaps you remember The Transformers? While they're different than they were back in the 80s, they're still around... I guess giant robots that transform into cars and planes are almost as timeless in capturing childhood imaginations as Dinosaurs and Tonka trucks.

Aside: I know what you're thinking, and yes, there actually were Transformers that transformed into Dinosaurs; cleverly called, ahem, Dinobots. All the kiddies loved Grimlock, their lovable T-Rex leader who was mildly retarded, yet incredibly strong. There were also Transformers that turned into Construction Vehicles, called, also cleverly, the Constructicons. The dump truck one was called Long Haul. My favorite Transformer was Wheeljack, who, not surprisingly due to my geeky upbringing, was the "mad scientist" of the good guys, the Autobots.

Now, does that mean that I'm about to somehow say that Farscape is similar to a war between opposing factions of said giant robots, one unyieldingly benevolent, the other ruthlessly evil? No. No, I'm not.

What I am going to say, is that the tagline for the Transformers is: "More than Meets the Eye," and that statement embodies my second big reason for loving Farscape.

Through an endless string of role reversals, shocks, surprises, and general use of turning situations on their proverbial heads, Farscape is able to take ideas and concepts that would otherwise be tired or overused in TV and sci-fi, and put a new spin on them to make them very interesting.

Farscape will often let you have a glimpse at the "easy way out" that the writers could take to resolve a seemingly insurmountable obstacle, and sometimes it will even appear that they're going to take it... and then, at the last second, something really amazing happens; they break a traditional "rule" of TV series. (This is especially for a sci-fi series, since they come from the Star Trek pedigree, who are the kings of the "easy way out," where everything formulaically and automagically ends up back where it started.)

Aside: Yes, I said automagically. I feel the need to address my purposeful mispronounciation, lest I be struck down for being a hypocrite; since I can't STAND the rampant (and entirely unintentional) use of mispronounced words like, "expecially," "supposubly," and their fruity cousin, "liberry."

So, basically what it boils down to is that in any given Farscape episode, you never really know what's going to happen, or who you're meeting, when there's a sticky situation or a guest star. It could just be something that is featured in that episode... but probably not.

At the very least, unless that person is killed (and sometimes even then...), you're probably going to see them again sometime.

Other times, you don't even realize you just met the latest "regular" cast member; who will be in the next 20+ episodes.

Aside: I guess a little corollary to this whole spiel on Farscape's counterintuitive approach would be a nod to the idea of reincorporation. I'm planning a catch-all "all the little things" post to wrap up my Farscape love letters, and this will get full focus there, but I think a little nod here is prudent. Reincorporation, sort of like Crichton's pop culture references, serves as sort of an inside joke, a little shout-out to the fans. Besides major things like bringin back characters, it's also present in a lot of little things that usually aren't mentioned overtly, but if you're paying attention and you've been watching, you pick up on them. (Like the crew's collection of weapons and devices being made up of an identifiable hodge-podge of stuff they've picked up from previous episodes.)

Again, I'm trying to keep this spoiler-free, so all I'll say is that somewhere in Season 3, Farscape breaks one of the biggest rules in TV and Sci-Fi shows. It starts as a predictable gimmick that is somewhat typical for the sci-fi genre, and you keep thinking that everything's going to end up normal by the end of the episode; and it really looks like it will. But then, suddenly, it doesn't happen. And it doesn't in the next episode. Or the one after that.... and you slowly realize that they just totally changed the dynamic of the show on you. It's one of my favorite glowing box moments, something I wish I could see again for the first time.

Aside: I think the first 5 minutes or so of the South Park Movie (From "Mountain Town" through "Uncle F*cka") has to top that list. I'm not sure I ever laughed or smiled that hard for that long when I first saw that. I was doubled over in pain and laughter for most of it, it was such pure, immature, lowest-denominator humor.

I also mentioned "role reversals" in my list of things that Farscape does differently.

The biggest role reversal is probably the fact that despite Crichton being apparently cast in the strong, fit, leading guy type of role; when push comes to shove, for at least most of the show's duration, Crichton ranks third (or worse) among his allies when it comes to shoving ability.

Aside: Now, if you've watched typical sci-fi, fantasy, or other shows that will occasionally include action, the main protagonist is usually either a) badass to begin with, either by nature or training, or b) acquires some kind of special power or weapon that makes him badass. In either case, the "leading guy" is the one who dishes out the heavy damage when it's fightin' time.

Farscape is a refreshing change, where though Crichton does indeed turn out to be "special" in some way, (Actually in several ways, depending on the season. This is a gimmick, but it's non-negotiable; there really wouldn't be too much reason for serious drama if he was just some guy out there that no one cared about.) it has nothing to do with his ability to fight or keep himself alive, and his two closest allies are much better at fighting than he is.

The other really big role reversal has to do with one of those allies; and it's going to have to wait for the next post.

Here's a teaser. One of the crew members on the show that fights better than Crichton is also the main love interest. Despite all the press photos of Farscape showing Claudia Black's character, Aeryn Sun, as a sexy babe snuggled up next to Crichton, the truth of the matter is that Aeryn wouldn't be caught dead playing subservient arm-hanger to Crichton. She's a soldier, and love, especially the expression of love, is just as alien to her as Crichton is, despite Sebaceans (Aeryn's alien race) looking identical to Humans.

Stand by for another thrashing of my favorite deceased equine target, Shakespearean Shrew-Taming.

I Heart Farscape, Part One: Big Trouble in Little Crichton

2006-04-05T15:18:00.000-04:00

Well, I've been mulling over a Farscape post for some time now, and I've decided that unless I provide an in-flight meal and Stadium Pals to everyone, I certainly can't expect anyone to sit through all my endless gushing.

Really though, I'm going to make a concerted effort to keep my commentary to WHY I love the show so much, instead of just prompting people to ask me why I haven't yet made a proposal of matrimony to the show. (Because you can't marry a show, it's illegal silly...)

Aside: By the way, I can't believe Stadium Pals even exist. Only in America are there people so lazy that they'll voluntarily wear something that will allow them to pee themselves so they don't have to get up. And don't worry ladies; they make one for you too. Gross. I must say though, they do have the best tagline ever: "When you gotta go, but you wanna stay."

As Kenny Banya of Seinfeld fame would say: "It's Gold, Jerry! Gold!"

So, I've decided to divy up my love for Farscape into several posts. Otherwise, I'll never do it, and/or you'll never read it.

I've also made an oath to keep these musings as spoiler-free as possible. While I would like to get specific in order to most accurately convey my feelings, I'll try and hold my tongue with hopes that someone watching this falls in love with Farscape as I did.

Which, by the way, is the only way I can possibly justify these posts as not being COMPLETELY self-indulgent. Yeah, ya see? Yeah, I'm trying to bring good TV to others, see? Lay off me, Copper.... :)

And, begin...

Please be aware that my "reasons for loving Farscape" are not in any priority order; it's just whatever I think of and want to write about at the time.

So, I can sum up Reason #1 simply by stating the title of the 3-part Finale of Season 4:

"We're So Screwed."

The crew on Farscape is never really sure about what they're doing, they're always in really big trouble, running from someone or something that's a lot bigger and stronger than they are, and barely getting away.

(By the way, Farscape is big fans of crazy 3-parters. Every season ends with one, and there are additional multi-part episodes peppered throughout each season. While there are certainly episodes that some deviate from the series' "main plot," pretty much every episode has some impact on the story and is revisited in some way later on; and some of those "tangent" episodes actually end up becoming much more important than you might think; but that's another post. :D)

This feeling of "being lost" is a constant touchstone in the series; both literal and figurative.

The lead role, John Crichton, played by Ben Browder, is a galactic fish-out-of-water. He's the only human around and he's REALLY far from home; despite some aliens looking very human, (okay.. they couldn't put EVERYONE in a wacky suit; but you'll be glad to know that only one perennial "regular" of the crew, besides Crichton, looks totally human) and, silly as it sounds, that adds to the empathic bond you start to feel for him.

He's a bright guy, but almost everyone and everything he encounters is technologically superior to him, so he has to brazenly jury-rig and wing it with just about everything he does; the result is a very amusing mix of MacGuyver and Han Solo; with some pop-culture references thrown in for good measure.

(I'm sure this will part of an "all the little things" post at some point, but hearing Crichton quote some commercial or something, and it kind of gets lost in translation with the aliens to the point where only we, the viewer, "get it," is pretty neat in an inside joke kind of way.)

The Han Solo reference is not a coincidence. I've already declared my love for the original Star Wars Trilogy; and the "We're So Screwed" phenomenon, at least vis a vis the sci-fi genre, might have originated with Lucas's Harrison Ford movies, both Star Wars and Indiana Jones.

Harrison Ford is just SO good at simultaneously conveying the danger and absurdity of being in REALLY big trouble. Ben Browder must've studied Ford, because he's got it down, and Crichton gets in a LOT more trouble than Han and Indy put together.

Consider the scene from Star Wars when the Millenium Falcon gets brought aboard the Death Star and the small band rescues Princess Leia. They employ some pretty silly strategy, mock up Chewbacca as a prisoner, and head down to the Detention block. When they arrive, they're facing the wrong way in the elevator, and everything goes bad after that... after the firefight, Han tries to cover it up:

HAN: (trying to sound official) Everything is under control. Situation normal.

INTERCOM VOICE: What happened?

HAN: (getting nervous) Uh...had a slight weapons malfunction. But, uh, everything's perfectly all right now. We're fine. We're all fine here, now, thank you. How are you? - CLASSIC!

INTERCOM VOICE: We're sending a squad up.

HAN: Uh, uh, negative. We had a reactor leak here... now give us a few minutes to lock it down. Large leak...very dangerous.

INTERCOM VOICE: Who is this? What's your operating number?

(Han blasts the comlink and it explodes.)

HAN: Boring conversation anyway... (yelling down the hall) Luke! We're going to have company!

That exchange, is of course, followed by them getting completely trapped in the Detention Block, and the Princess has to save their asses by blasting a hole in a grate and telling them all to jump into the garbage chute; where they all almost die again.

Another perfect example of the phenomenon is in Return of the Jedi, when ANOTHER rescue attempt gets completely botched; this time when they try to save Han from Jabba's palace. After they get discovered and captured, they bring everyone in front of Jabba for his decree; Han can't see (hibernation sickness from being frozen in carbonite) but he hears Luke's voice and asks,

HAN: "How we doin'?"

LUKE: "Same as always.."

HAN: "That bad, huh?"

Those Star Wars moments are completely reminiscent of what the Farscape crew faces nearly every episode.

Despite the obvious reasons of enjoying this for the "omygod, look what just happened to them.. well, what the hell are they going to do NOW?" factor, I think I like the "We're So Screwed" phenomenon so much because it's so different from other sci-fi TV series, like Star Trek.

The Enterprise is the Federations's flagship; the most powerful ship in the armada of a powerful faction in the known Universe. And even though they still get screwed over and almost blown up nearly every episode, they have all manner of photon torpedoes, force shields, and deflector dishes to do pretty much anything with.

Moya (The ship in Farscape) is a living beast of burden, with no weapons, and her crew are escaped prisoners being pursued by the armada of a powerful faction of the known Universe.

(Don't worry, that's all first episode exposition stuff.)

So, to sum up WHY the "We're so Screwed" phenomenon is so appealing to me, I guess I'd have to say that, on an unconscious level, I really respect the writers of the show for apparently painting themselves into a corner so many times, only to surprise you with how they get out of it; or sometimes, shock you by having them NOT get out of it.

Willing Warriors; Tantalizing TV or Anachronistic Anti-Humans?

2006-03-29T14:29:00.000-05:00

Of the dichotomous populace of TV watchers, I belong to the half that (generally) likes reality TV. Why? Well, I enjoy experiencing real emotion from real people... from my real couch.

One of my surprise favorite reality shows from last year was The Deadliest Catch.

In a nutshell, the show follows a handful of Alaskan crab fishermen as they risk life and limb to make a LOT of money in a short amount of time, catching crab by using very heavy and dangerous equipment on rocky boats navigating through rough seas full of water so cold that if you aren't wearing a survival suit, (which is so beefy it makes you look like a 4 year old on a snow day; so they can't work in them) and you aren't rescued within a couple of minutes, you're dead.

And oh yeah, they use Bon Jovi music and the whole thing is narrated by the guy from Dirty Jobs who has that awesome voice.

The new season of TDC premiered last night; and despite what I had heard at the end of the previous season about a major change in the format, I was brimming with anticipation.

I'm witholding final judgment for now, but initial signs aren't good.

Why? Well, as I made allusions to, there's a major change in the format... and in the process of considering that, I really have to question my thoughts about TV vis a vis my moral compass. You see, there's a bit of The Running Man appeal in TDC.

Aside: The Running Man, a story by Stephen King, and later a movie starring our favorite Californian Governator, is a game show set in the future that shows a potential culmination to the Reality TV phenomenon; where contestants fight to the death for the amusement of the mob. It's the Gladiators of Rome all over again. This idea has seen many incarnations; in videogames and movies. Sometimes the "gladiators" are prisoners being forced to fight, sometimes it's voluntary and you can win lots of money and prizes, etc.

(SmashTV is one of my favorite games of all time; I'm always a big fan of breakneck-paced action, fighting to survive against endless hordes of mindless enemies.)

So, how does this apply to TDC?

Well, deep sea fishing in freezing waters requires strategy, luck, physical and mental toughness, and it is VERY dangerous.

And the money is very real. The deck hands usually make around $30,000-$40,000, and on up the ladder to the captains, who often make 6 figures. And that's for ONE TRIP; less than a week!! With several crab "seasons" a year; it's a very lucrative business.

Finally, getting to the reason why my moral compass is put into question; the danger and death is very real too. LOTS of things can go wrong out there, 50+ miles from shore, and a lot of them lead to you being dead. If you watched the first season, you saw what I'm talking about. They earn their money.

Now, I know I don't like people dying; I get no pleasure out of that... but I'm questioning myself now... do I like this show because people might die?? I have to admit, the danger and urgency is a necessary catalyst for the subsequent bravery and comraderie displayed on the show to come through; and that's a lot of what makes it appealing.

And this brings me to my point.

Up until this past season, crab fishing in Alaska has been "derby style" fishing.

What this means is, the US Department of Fish and Game decides exactly when the 'season' on a certain crab starts, and how many crab (and of what size) can be caught for this season. Every boat must report all that they catch in real time; so that when the quota is close to being reached, the Fish & Game people put a firm deadline announcement out to end the 'season,' and no crab can be caught after that. There are tamper-proof cameras on each boat that track and record what they catch and when, so no one can cheat.

What does this mean? Well, it means that if you're a crab fisherman, and you're getting paid $7-10 a pound for crab, you want to catch as much crab as possible, as quickly as possible, so that when the horn sounds ending the end of the season, your contribution to the quota will be bigger than anyone else's, and therefore, you can sell more than anyone else. And because no one really knows exactly where the large nomadic biomasses of crab are; that means from the moment the 'season' opens, you're working as much as you possibly can, and that means sleeping the least you possibly can.

And as any cold/flu medication bottle will tell you; you should NOT be operating heavy machinery when drowsy. How about when you've had about 6 hours of sleep over 3 days, and you're on a boat in the Bering Sea with rocky waves crashing over the boat; there are 40mph winds with sleet, and you need to navigate 800lb steel crab traps with a giant hydraulic crane on a slippery deck dotted with deck hands trying to do all manner of baiting, pulling, sorting, etc.

The result of this, in spite (because?) of the danger and the fact that people do get hurt and occasionally die, is some very good television. Depression and elation come and go just like the waves. When a boat has been unlucky, the season is half over, and they all of a sudden hit massive amounts of crab; it's really good stuff.

Or should I say... was good stuff.

Like I said before... the derby fishing was "up until last season." The Department of Fish and Game decided to do away with that style; and is enforcing a system where each boat is only allowed to catch "their share" of the season's quota for that crab; and of course that's all they can sell. The urgency, the volatility, the powerful emotion swings... gone.

This system is much safer; no more sleep deprivation, no more risks, no more back-breaking work at a breakneck pace. Everyone catches what they're allowed to catch, no more.

It's still dangerous to fish for crab; that's for sure... but it's a lot less exciting now.

Now, before you take a look at that comment and start questioning my aforementioned morality; consider this.

EVERY Captain of the crab boats they talked to was upset that Fish & Game was doing this. As dangerous as it was, they ALL lived for the rush of the derby style fishing. It meant that depending on your strategy, effort, and luck; you could strike it rich, or barely cover your costs.

It was a gamble; their very lives and livelihood were on the line as they depended on each other and the hand of cards that the seas dealt them; and they loved it.

In the opener to this season, all the captains featured in the show are at a bar talking about the season, and they raise their glasses in a surly and sarcastic toast to Fish & Game.

If these men WANT to do it; if they want the risk; if they want the competition; if they want capitalism over communism... why should the government get in the way??

They know the risks better than anyone, and they choose to do it regardless. Not everyone has that pioneer spirit in them that almost needs the danger and risk, and while, in general, humans don't need that anymore... I don't think it should be discouraged. That spirit was what carved out a chunk of our land; and that shouldn't be forgotten and abandoned.

Now, am I saying this because I believe it, or because I want the show to "matter" again?

I'm not sure, definitely some of both.

But considering that it's so dangerous, I start to think about some of the other shows I like to watch where there's a lot of danger.

For example, I really like MMA, or Mixed Martial Arts; and this is just about as gladiator as you can get. I first fell in love with MMA when The Ultimate Fighting Championship was born back in 1993. They got together all sorts of expert martial artists to see who would win in a tournament with VERY few rules. (no biting, no eye-gouging) It was barbaric, sure, but it was riveting, and slowly but surely, some insights to some really long unanswered questions, like which martial art is the best in a real fight against someone who knows how to fight?

The sport evolved and eventually tried to become legitimate. (With a lot of success; UFC events are finally now on regular cable instead of pay-per-view; thanks to the SpikeTV reality show, The Ultimate Fighter) Now, there are a LOT of rules in the UFC to protect fighters, and it's become clear as to which styles "work." While the whole "Kumite" appeal is pretty much gone now, the spectacle has evolved into a sport.

Now, that sport is dangerous, obviously, and people DEFINITELY get hurt. But it's very unlikely that someone's going to die in UFC, and again, all of these guys WANT to do this.

Shouldn't people be allowed to do these things if they want to? And, well, shouldn't people like me be able to watch and be entranced and maybe a little envious of their ability to throw caution to the wind?

Well, since it's been over a year...

2006-03-26T18:39:00.000-05:00

I guess I should start sprucing up the place.

I threw a couple links on the sidebar there, and I'm going to get my grubby mitts on a digital camera so you all can see my ugly mug.

And despite the fact that I get paid for my Graphic Design skills; I sadly am not "joe html" so unless I break out Dreamweaver or Pagemaker; I'm going to have to teach myself how to make this place look nicer.

Frange Rants Part Deux; Can I really hate anyone?

2006-03-21T11:42:00.000-05:00

I hope this post doesn't come off too much in the Captain Obvious vein of "mean people suck," and I know I've sort of hit on this note once before in my postings, but after watching more episodes of Intervention (and The First 48) I feel compelled to sound off on just how difficult it is to see what some people are capable of, and the consequences it brings.

In Intervention, they basically ask an addict to participate in a documentary about addiction, and neglect to tell them that they will face an Intervention by their family and friends at the end of the documentary filming.

I don't watch this show for the "train wreck" factor of seeing how some people destroy themselves and react negatively to an Intervention, though I could see how that might be entertaining to some. But, at least for me, the show does way too good of a job making you understand and feel for these people, and by the end of the show when they have the Intervention, I'm just really hoping that they can see past their pride and/or their psychological barriers, and realize that they really really need help, and they're past the point of being able to do it on their own.

Now, it's important to note that I said, "by the end of the show" because lots of times, when you first meet these people, you really can't stand them. I've seen a lot of these addicts be really horrible people to get what they need. Nearly all of them lie to, steal from, and abuse their family and friends, and lots of them then have the nerve to be furious when they find out that their family kept the Intervention a secret from them until they got them there.

So what happens during the course of the show that makes me sympathize with these addicts?

Well, a lot, but to boil it down, every show has what I've come to call, "baby picture time." This is when they have a montage of pictures of the addict when they were a kid growing up, and the addict's family is talking about how great of a kid they were, how much promise they had, and how "full of life" the addict once was.

Then they do this thing where the screen fades to black, and white text comes up on the screen that says something like this,

"When she was 6, Annie was molested by a close family friend."

And you're like, ".....damn... Goddamn.. that sucks."

And then they talk about how she just wasn't happy anymore, and how things just sort of changed... and then they hit you with the hammer...

"When she was 17, Annie was raped by a co-worker."

And you just hang your head, you can't even fathom what that would do to you... and it just all sort of makes sense.

Again, I apologize for ranting and not offering any sort of analysis or intelligent commentary, but how the hell can people do this to someone else?!

It's so horrible, so unbelievably selfish; and in the case of rape and molestation, which is far too common, it's destroying another person's entire life for mere minutes of depraved pleasure. I'm fortunate to have never endured such horror, but it's plainly obvious that it's impossible to ever be the same as you once were. The way you look at humanity in general changes; you've seen the very worst of a person's potential, and that just doesn't go away.

The problem is, as much as I think every rapist and molester should never be able to walk the streets again; I don't think that stiffer penalties, even the threat of the death penalty, would stop the people that do this from doing this. That's not to say that I think that a rapist or molester should ever be allowed to go free, but I just think that it's disheartening that harsher consequences probably wouldn't be an effective deterrent.

It's a sickness. No one aspires to be a sociopath. It takes a certain (mis)wiring of the brain to be capable of causing such damage to someone, either physically or emotionally.

And that gets me thinking. I can see how horrible the addicts are, especially those who scream at their families at the Intervention, claiming they've been betrayed, but yet I sympathize for them when I see the demons they wrestle with inside... can the same be said about the molesters and rapists? Can I sympathize for them, too?

I'm really not sure, and it would be a case-by-case thing, but I really don't think so.

There are fundamental differences; I mean, an addict, while they're abusive and cause pain to their families and friends, it's almost entirely because of their self-destruction, not because the addict is purposefully hurting their loved ones.

I'm of the opinion that everyone is fundamentally good, and those that do evil fall into several categories:

First, there's the ones that truly believe that what they're doing isn't evil or wrong. This could be a matter of interpretation, delusion, or the ability to compartmentalize and see an action as each small part rather than the sum and the consequences.

Second, there are those who know what they're doing is wrong and evil, but feels justified or that his or her action are necessary. This includes the guy who steals so he can eat, the soldier that kills on the battlefield, the vigilante mentality of eye-for-an-eye or the righteous smiting the wicked.

Third, there's those who know what they're doing is wrong, don't feel justified, but still do it because they can't face the consequences of not doing it. This is where the addicts come in. The addict that steals her mom's TV to sell it for meth hates that she does it, but she can't face not having meth, so it's almost a lesser of two evils to them. You can actually sort of trace this back to see that in many of these cases, the decision to become an addict in the first place falls in this same category. Rather than face what they feel they can't face, namely the horrible things that have been done to them, they block it out with dependency and self-destruction.

Finally, there are those who know what they're doing is wrong, but it just doesn't matter to them. The "rules" of what's right and wrong aren't their rules, and they might know them, but the real reasons why they're in place eludes them. These are the sociopaths.

It's never like it is in the cartoons or the storybooks. The villian never really is the villian, but a sociopath is about as close as you get.

Aside: Speaking of villians, one of my favorite villian debates is whether Gargamel wanted to eat the Smurfs, or turn them into Gold. After several heated discussions, I believe I've found the definitive answer.

Both.

(A lot of people say that the original motivation for the start of the series was turning them into gold, and only Azrael wanted to eat the Smurfs, but after ratings dropped, the producers decided to have Gargamel want to eat them too.)

Anyways, it's hard to get back into talking seriously about such things after going on a damn Smurfs tangent; though, actually, if you hadn't heard, Unicef made a Smurfs video that's really pretty disturbing:

http://media.putfile.com/end_of_smurfs

So.. end of rant.

2006-03-12T19:45:00.000-05:00

More to come later, I have a bunch to say... but in the meantime; when I went to tvguide.com to see if someone was running an "Oh yeah, just in case you aren't an elephant and don't remember what happened twenty years ago when The Sopranos were last on" special prelude to tonight's new episode (I think "The TV Guide Channel" has something); I happened upon this:

The Cutting Edge. Two.

Made for TV... ABC Family.... sigh.

They, ahem, turn the original story on its head by featuring Christy Carlson Romano (Belle in Broadway's Beauty and the Beast, and the voice of TV's "Kim Possible") as Jackie Dorsey, apparently the eventual offspring of the D.B. Sweeney and Moira Kelly characters from the first movie.

"Jackie" (sorry, but that's such a stretch it's Reed Richards esque) is a champion figure skater, but of course, everything changes when she ends up with a new partner, derp!

Now... you know the knuckleheads who made this movie couldn't have just gotten another ice skater. No. So what other sport has crossover potential? Yes, you guessed it....

Roller Blading.

This is a direct quote from the movie's webpage: "Ross Thomas is Alex Harrison, a champion in-line skater with attitude to spare. He's got the moves on land but can he cut it on the ice? And when it comes to being Jackie's partner, does he have what it takes to melt an ice princess' heart?"

Now, I know, my love for The Cutting Edge is strange. But this is just wrong. This is The Next Karate Kid all over again, and somehow I don't think Ms. Carlson Romano, or Mr. Harrison, are going to break out and win an academy award someday.

Enough with the shitting on the bad movies that were suprisingly good by making another bad movie on the same premise that accomplishes nothing other than showing how bad the first bad movie could've been had it not had something save it from being bad.

Frange Rants; Why a car built by reject kids can do 0 to 60 in 4 seconds, 50 mpg, on <$2.00/gal soybean biodiesel; and won't hit the marketplace.

2006-03-01T11:35:00.000-05:00

Mandatory Preamble: I'm loath to talk about politics or economics on here; that is not for what I intended this space, and there are few areas colored more gray than which political or economic view is "right." However, as my last post on diamonds will attest, there are stories I read from time to time that cause such a sufficiently incendiary reaction in me; I must breach protocol and speak out.

So apologies for two posts in a row without your expected fare of meaty retrospective self-analysis seasoned with several tablespoons of popular media.

But, to get things started, just so you aren't totally left in want for silly movie references; I'll quote just about my favorite dialogue exchange for starting a duel, from The Princess Bride:

Inigo: "So you're ready then?"

Westley: "Whether I am or not, you've been more than fair."

Inigo: "You seem a decent fellow, I hate to kill you..."

Westley: "You seem a decent fellow, I hate to die..."

Inigo: "Begin..."

I think that, (and don't go all Mr. Miyagi on me and tell me that staying in the middle-of-the-road will get me "squashed like grape") in just about any conflict worth fighting for, both sides are right, certainly from their point of view, but often objectively as well.

(Insert obligatory Star Wars reference about Luke Skywalker getting upset about learning that Obi-Wan lied to him about what happened to his father; then backtracked by saying that what he said was true, "From a certain point of view..." Okay, so the post isn't completely without it's pop culture crap; I can't help it.)

During one of my Philosophy classes in college, I argued that quite possibly the number one determinant for one's stance on any number of "hotbed" world issues is Geography. Of course, geography influences so many other factors that are the "real" reasons, but consider this: If I were born in, say, Kabul, Afganistan; my opinions on "The War on Terror" would almost certainly be different from, and likely at odds with, most people in America. But would I be wrong?

Judging someone or something that we don't understand, is, in my opinion, mankind's greatest folly. If anything is going to lead to the end of the human race and/or the planet Earth, I'm guessing it could all be traced back to a misinformed decision. If anything is holding us back from true peace and happiness as a people, it's prejudice and jealousy; it's a lack of understanding, a resultant erroneous emotion, and an irrational reaction.

In the race of life, I often think the Republican "hands off" approach is a good idea; if people can sprint, let them sprint. But when I see that those hands could be picking up runners who have fallen, or clearly gotten tripped or pushed, maybe even by one of those sprinters, and it wasn't their fault; well, then I start to question myself. Maybe the Democrat's way of having a few policemen stopping traffic now and again isn't so bad. Sure, you can't go as fast as you want, but a lot less people get hurt, and at least the people in the back have a chance. But then I start to think again about the people in the back that are only there because they're lazy, and they know that eventually someone will give them a hand; and the people in front will have to wait for them, and that's not fair.

The fact is, it's not cut-and-dry, and while I respect people for taking a side and defending it, because I really can't do it and keep a straight face when someone points out a clear deficiency; there's a reason why politics and economics can be argued till the cows come home without a clear "winner."

So, all that said; I'm usually all for capitalism and the free market, it tends to be able to regulate itself out of problems with competition and innovation, but every once in a while, I'm reminded of the dark side; the occasional occurrence where the greed and power of the few results in stymied growth of technology and effeciency, and that affects all of us.

My favorite story to tell on this subject used to be how a couple of MIT grad students designed a car battery that ran on 5 pounds of sugar, never needed replacing (except the sugar), was environmentally friendly, and was just as reliable and powerful as your normal acid battery. GM approached the guys and offered to buy their idea outright for a lump sum; the kids agreed, and the sugar battery was buried.

Lately, the whole DRM (Digital Rights Management) and HDCP (Hardware Data Copy Protection) thing has been my favorite, with the MPAA, Hollywood, Microsoft, Intel, and others obviously trying to hold back and hamstring new technologies so they can try and make more money for longer, despite the historical precedent (set from audio and video cassette recorders), that eventually, we'll probably just be able to record whatever the hell we want.

Well, here's my new favorite:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/17/eveningnews/main1329941.shtml

The fact that we've heard all about hybrids and even to some extent, Hydrogen-Cell powered cars; why hasn't biodiesel gotten the same cred?

I mean, who's the #1 producer (and exporter) of Soybeans in the WORLD??? Uh.. I dunno... US?

I really hope there's something behind this story that was conveniently left out; something that "breaks" the viability of this technology. Because if a car built by highschool dropouts and dysfunctional kids who were, "rummaging for parts, configuring wires and learning as they went" can have that kind of performance, using that fuel; I really see no reason why this tech has been left in the cold, other than the greed of the auto industry and oil companies.

I'm no expert, but if oil-lovin' Bush is going to get up during the State of the Union Address and start talking (ahem) seriously about really using alternative energy, then I'd assume he's willing to make the necessary infrastructure changes (and probably tax breaks) so alternative fuels are accessible and affordable to people who choose to go with Hydrogen, Ethanol, or Biodiesel. And if the fuel can be made accessible, I don't really see why biodiesel can't be at least part of the solution to start cutting back our oil imports. (BTW, Ethanol can be made from Corn, and we grow plenty of that too...)

I mean, given that we tend to regularly go about sippin' the Haterade on a bunch of countries, including Venezuela, (who jumped into third place in December on our crude import list past Saudi Arabia, behind only Canada and Mexico;) well, maybe we should have a plan if Chavez decides to stop playing the role of the South Park "Heeeey Guy" nice-guy Saddam, and starts talking to OPEC about hitting us with the oil price stick.

Valentine Hypocrisy, De Beers Must be Destroyed, and How I Segue from Gourmet Cooking to The Empire Strikes Back

2006-02-14T15:49:00.000-05:00

Enjoy.

This is as civil a post as I can muster on this day. I vow to not collapse in tears at my loneliness, and I will not rant ad inifinitum on the fact that Valentine's Day causes more frowns than smiles, and I'll even leave the whole commercialism conspiracy theory alone. (Well, not entirely.)

Why? Well, besides being even more self-indulgent than my usual blogging fare, well, I have to be honest. I haven't spent all my Valentine's Days alone, and on those occasions when February 14th rolled around and I did have a current cuddle companion, I relished the opportunity to put together an expressive experience to show my affection for that special someone; and while I haven't had the opportunity since I've started to make "real" money, I think that's actually a good thing.

I learned a lot about putting my heart and soul into something, and not just my wallet.

I don't talk about it all that much on here, but my kitchen kung-fu is strong. I've watched a lot of food network (There's an entry on my list of "posts to do someday" where I'll outline my man-crush on Alton Brown.) and I'm Italian, so I kind of have the culinary version of a green thumb.

Creating a very special dinner for a very special someone is probably my favorite way to show how I feel. When you know someone so well, and in some cases, almost completely, the tiniest thing can mean so much; like replacing the lemon and parsley normally used in Shrimp Scampi with lime and cilantro, or putting sun-dried tomato in the pesto instead of pine nuts.

(Geek Alert Aside) When Han Solo is captured by Boba Fett and the Empire, and is about to be frozen in carbonite and brought back to Jabba the Hut; Princess Leia feels compelled to blurt out, "I love you!" Han's line was supposed to be, "I love you too..." but Harrison Ford knew that Han wouldn't say that, even if that's what he felt, and even if that's what he meant when he said instead, "I know."

A lot of people that hear that tidbit are like, "Yeah, Han's too cool to say he loves her back." But that's not just it. Leia just isn't saying it to Han, she's also saying it to herself because she's realizing it for the first time. He's saying "I know" because he knew her so well that he knew that she loved him before she even did.

Now, I'm not saying that making up a special dinner is going to turn me into Harrison Ford (saving what could have been yet another ackwardly clumsy George Lucas love scene;) but, well, sometimes it can mean a lot more than a pair of earrings that cost ten times as much as the dinner.

You can't really get around the roses though; they're pretty necessary.

Speaking of jewelry... that brings me to the original idea for this post. When I think of the commercialism of Valentine's Day, I always think of a WIRED article I read a couple years ago. To date, it's probably my favorite article from that magazine:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/diamond.html

I would hope that you find the article so stimulating that you need no additional encouragement, but, I'm about to comment on the article, so if you don't want to be lost, read up.

I see a few major sections of the article. And while I'm certainly geeky enough to pontificate on the potential possibilities of powerful processors based on diamond semiconductor cores, I'll leave that off, and instead focus on the whole synthetic-diamond-as-jewelry thing.

Now, I haven't done a lot of research, I've only done some preliminary searching, but all accounts that I've read point to De Beers being evil bastards. I mean, Microsoft is evil, what with their monopolistic aspirations, but they don't come close to the list of the atrocities from this article "Ten Reasons Why You Should Never Accept a Diamond Ring from Anyone, Under Any Circumstances, Even If They Really Want to Give You One" by CPE Staff Economist Liz Stanton, written on Valentine's Day 4 years ago.

Think that I had to look hard for that piece? Try googling "De Beers Cartel." There's hundreds of articles that harp on the same points. (And yes, they are a CARTEL; they artificially control supply, price, and marketing for the industry.)

So, when I read about synthetic diamonds, I was elated. Not only is there tremendous potential for lasers, semiconductors, and file storage; but there are diamonds for jewelry being made outside of De Beers' reign, where no one was hurt or killed in the process.

Everyone heard about those miners that died a few months ago; I mean, jeez, there's a story like that practically every year. Mining is dangerous business, and despite advances in technology and safety, there are still accidents on a regular basis.

Combine this with the guerilla wars in Africa and South America where many diamond deposits are discovered, and there's a lot of bloodshed, accidental and purposeful, that goes into diamonds. (Don't believe me? Want to read this article on the diamond mines in Angola? And oh yeah, De Beers is there.)

Anyways, back to the WIRED article.

"Synthetic" diamonds and natural diamonds are the SAME. Chemically, physically, they're the same. I mean sure, the Gemesis diamonds often have traces of some of the metal solvents trapped in the lattice structure, but natural diamonds often have minerals trapped in their structure as well. If you really want to go crazy with it, diamonds made the Apollo diamond way (Microwave beam -> Plasma Cloud -> Precipitation) are even MORE diamonds than natural diamonds, because that's all there is to them, they're made in a clean room, and there aren't any other rocks invited to the party.

So De Beers is trying to say that real diamonds are the only REAL symbols of love because they were made over thousands of years; not in a week.

Okay, well, I know I just got through talking about the little things meaning so much, and the idea of love being eternal and being symbolized by this hardest substance known to man forged deep in the earth for thousands of years.. well that sounds great... but for the sake of Pete, when the guy in the lab coat takes the synthetic diamond out of the growth chamber, he doesn't get shot by a warlord with an AK-47!

So you can sort of consider synthetic diamonds as the jewelry version of buying organic. Now, when you buy organic or free-range or whatever, you normally pay a premium in exchange for peace of mind, the chickens aren't cramped up, the tomatoes aren't injected with salmon genes to withstand the cold, your beef isn't steroid-laced.

But oh yeah, synthetic diamonds aren't more expensive than natural diamonds. No, they're half, or sometimes even a third, of the price of natural diamonds; which aren't rare, and aren't expensive. All that is a myth to perpetuate De Beers' silhouette-laden marketing campaign of the mysterious and mystical diamond; and to continue to allow them to charge extortionist amounts.

By the way, did you know that De Beers also strongarms jewelers into never letting someone sell back an old diamond for a reasonable price? Pretty clever to implement that kind of strategy for a commodity that stands up to time and wear so well.

(Here's a good article about De Beers and their stranglehold on the diamond industry, entitled "Have you ever tried to sell a diamond?")

So much for "a diamond is forever."

Eliminates Flakes and Wins Hearts in One Easy Step

2006-02-01T02:55:00.000-05:00

First off, I feel that I owe you folks an explanation, nay, an apology, for not posting for a while.

At first I said explanation, but I realize that I have neither an explanation nor an excuse. I haven’t been sick or unbelievably busy or anything. I’ve just been doing other things with my free time (I’m a gamer, and World of Warcraft consumes many nights when I don’t have other plans :D) and haven’t had the creative juices flowing enough to deliver the high quality product you’ve come to know and expect from me.

Aside: Hey, at least I’m a social gamer. While I do enjoy single-player games as well from time to time, the games that consume me are the games I can play with my friends and/or compete with others online. When I play WoW, I’m usually playing with my buddies, and running a voice program called Ventrilo, so I’m simultaneously playing the game while talking to my brother upstairs, my buddy who lives 3 minutes away, my other buddy who lives in Manhattan, and my two high school friends who live in Las Vegas, all at once, like they’re right next to me, just like our characters are in the game. Very cool. It’s just another one of those moments where I just want to bow down in reverence to Isidore of Seville, patron saint of the Internet.

I guess I could blame some of my posting delinquency on the fact that the Knicks stink so bad that I’m constantly depressed after watching them tank it night after night. I can’t help myself though; I’m a fan, I have to watch and hope. (Well, technically speaking, I usually watch in fast forward on my TiVo when they’re down by 20, but I still watch, just in case they make a comeback!)

So, sorry. Consider me back in the saddle.

As this blog has somehow evolved (devolved?) into a mish-mash of self-exploration and hopeless romanticism through movies and TV Shows, I’ll not break character; I shall stick to what you’ve come to know and expect from me. This one comes from my list of “posts I should do someday.” Enjoy.

The fine folks at Proctor & Gamble, makers of Head & Shoulders, tell us in the commercial for their popular Dandruff Shampoo, “You never get a second chance to make a first impression.”

So, taking that idea, and applying it to cinema rather than scalp health; what’s the best movie to share with someone with whom you’re trying to get cozy for the first time?

Now, before people get all persnickety on me, let me lay down a couple of assumptions for this hypothetical situation:

Let’s assume that all of the choosing responsibility is handed to you willingly; so there’s no power struggle and no need to bring prospective choices before a tribunal of world leaders in Geneva.

Let’s also assume that there will be no issues with prejudice or previous viewings. You can make the assumption that your crush hasn’t seen the movie before and has no preconceived notions about the movie.

So, given those ground rules, I suppose it depends on your philosophy vís a vís the prospective partner. What are you trying to accomplish? What message are you trying to convey?

What’s your Head & Shoulders Movie?

For me, well, I’m projecting a little bit about myself with this movie choice, while simultaneously looking to see if there’s acceptance and/or reciprocation. I’m not looking to get in the sack that night, (though I would be interested to know what movie can pull that one off), but rather I’m looking to, after the movie ends, have one of those nights where you spend hours just talking, sharing stories, and smiling uncontrollably, while slowly coming to the realization that it’s the beginning of something very, very good.

Okay, well, maybe a little tonsil hockey nightcap… at the very end there… yeah... I think that would be kinda awesome.

That said; there’s a few “musts” for my movie choice:

The movie has to be funny. Not a “stupid-funny” movie that is just a one-dimensional vehicle for telling jokes, (Sorry Rob Schneider, there really needs to be some trust in place before I whip out Deuce Bigelow) but comedy and laughter is so important to me; I have too large of a silly side to not have that be part of this movie.

The movie has to have a love story. Now, just like the comedy thing, I’m not looking for a heart-wrenching tale with all the requisite pining, sorrow, and unfulfillment. Now, the love story is indeed the glue that holds the movie together, for sure, and so the love has to be meaningful, but let’s just say that I better not have to discreetly wipe my eyes more than once or twice. (Yeah, yeah, I’m sensitive, blah blah)

The movie has to have great dialogue. I’m looking for copious quick quips of quirkiness, but not sacrificing quality for quantity. I don’t need unnecessary use of big words, I don’t need iambic pentameter; I just want smart, fast-paced verbal sparring.

The movie has to have a twist. Whether the entire premise of the movie is the twist, or the twist comes in the plot, the presentation, or the characters; something has to be different. While I can put up with some predictability in movies, if I know what’s going to happen, it better be really entertaining or shown in a different way than I’d expect.

The movie has to have good music. Whether it’s from a score or a soundtrack, I’m big into music from movies. I definitely feel myself be more immersed in the movie if the music’s good. Plus, I won’t deny it; I’m a big sucker for the musical montage.

The movie has to have some kind of coolness factor or geek appeal to it. I mean, I’m trying to make an impression, and I want to present something accessible that this person will truly enjoy, but it’s foolish of me to completely ignore what I am at heart. I’m not looking to pull off a sexual coup with smoke and mirrors; I’m trying to let someone vicariously peer into my soul. Now, I’m smart enough not to pop in the pilot episode of Farscape, that’s going a little too far too fast, but there’s gotta be something in there that's geeky so I can gauge a reaction. (BTW, if you can tolerate sci-fi, I implore you to give Farscape a try. It died over an unfortunate money struggle between the Sci-Fi channel and the Jim Henson people, but I have all of the episodes, and while I’ve been saving the series-finale movie for a rainy day, I can say that this series… well… I better not start. Let’s just say I’ve never had a more pleasurable TV experience than I have had watching Farscape; it's really that good, and I'll be writing a post on it.)

So.

What did I come up with?

I came up with a few possibilities, but only one clear winner.

Here are three honorable mentions:

Pulp Fiction. It’s got the dialogue. It’s got the humor. It’s got the coolness factor. Awesome soundtrack. It definitely has the twist; I love the way QT uses chronology in his storytelling. It’s missing the love story though; this could definitely be a solid second showing choice though.

The Princess Bride. It’s got the dialogue. It’s definitely got the humor. It’s got the geek appeal. It even has a love story and it’s presented in a different style that qualifies as a twist. So what’s wrong with this? Well, besides the lack of good music, it’s me. I’m what’s wrong with it. I recently saw One Man Star Wars in NYC thanks to a very cool Xmas gift from my buddy, and upon leaving, I realized that with some practice and dedication, I could probably put up a pretty decent One Man Princess Bride. I have trouble making it through this movie without doing impressions, spoiling lines, and just being a dork in general.

Love Actually. This is definitely a solid choice, but it’s a little too much on the love stuff for me. There’s a couple predictable moments and situations where the impossible is made way too possible. But I’m all for suspension of disbelief and everything when it’s called for, and I really liked this movie; especially the “Merry Christmas Everyone” ending, but this movie just isn’t “me” enough.

Now, if I had pondered this a few years ago, Top Gun would probably make this list of honorable mentions too; but now, with Tom Cruise going totally nuts, and the fact that the movie’s coolness has somewhat faded, well, Kenny Loggins music and “You’ve lost that lovin’ feelin” just don’t cut it anymore.

There’s probably a couple more I’m missing, but I’ll not keep you waiting any longer.

My choice is Grosse Pointe Blank.

I love this movie. For me, it has everything.

First, John Cusack is a romantic lead that every guy seems to get along with. John Cusack as a professional assassin AND romantic lead. Um, yes please?

Joan Cusack and Dan Aykroyd both are amazing in supporting roles; and the bit characters (and you know I love me some bit characters) rule as well with the likes of Alan Arkin, Jeremy Piven, and Hank Azaria lending their skills.

Now, we come to Minnie Driver. While a lot of people are love-or-hate with her; I think she was perfect in this. She captures a slight immaturity and goofiness that I find so irresistibly appealing and endearing. Her “Ya cyan’t come in” line, followed by the Superman scene in her old bedroom gets me every time. She sometimes treads the same line between bubbly/cute and saccharin/annoying that Rachael “Yum-O” Ray does; but I keep finding myself watching her too, so I guess I’m okay with it.

So… GPB:

Comedy? Check.
Love Story? Check.
Great dialogue? Check.
Great Soundtrack? Check.
Twist? Check.
Coolness? Check.

Lather.

Rinse.

Repeat.

Anyone else out there want to share their Head & Shoulders movie?

Better than Summer, Donna

2006-01-27T15:58:00.000-05:00

I've been informed that I've made it onto Cindy's link list, and as such, I might be getting more traffic on a day-to-day basis than my current readership of.. um.. Cindy.

So, have I exploited the extra traffic by consistently and reliably putting out posts that are both poignant and amusing?

No. No I haven't. But I will. In the meantime, here's a stupid SNL bit for those that who now find themselves impacted at an impossibly impetuous impatient impasse.

Crazy Lady : "Who dis?"

Impatient Man: "David Schwimmer?"

Crazy Lady : "What dis?"

Impatient Man: "The Dow Jones?"

Crazy Lady: "And what a person, place, or ting?"

Impatient Man: "...a noun?"

Crazy Lady: "Okay, put it togetha nah!"

Impatient Man: "Schwimmer... Dow... Noun?"

Crazy Lady: "Stretch it out nah!"

Impatient Man: "SchwiimmmerrDowwwNoun?"

Crazy Lady: "Das right Simma Down Nah!! You got ta Simma Down Nah!"

My Own Personal "It's a Wonderful Life" Moment

2006-01-03T17:45:00.000-05:00

Well, huh. I guess life is worth living after all.

Your Introduction to "The Wheels of Rationalization"

2006-01-03T03:16:00.000-05:00

Attention: This marks the first post where I’m using Blogger for Word, so there may be some differences in the look of the posts. Some of these differences will be purposeful choices, others may not. It’s a work in progress. Enjoy.

Here comes another guilty-pleasure movie post.

Now, up until this point, I have been able to analyze and somehow come up with a cockamamie path of logic to justify my enjoyment of a movie that would otherwise be dismissed as pure trash.

Unfortunately, this particular movie is proving to be an extremely difficult challenge, and I almost don’t want to find out why I really like it…

I just saw the last twenty minutes of <gulp> Just One of the Guys. Again.

I think now is the time that I must introduce the concept of “Spinning the Wheels of Rationalization.” Picture your hands grasping handles attached to either side of your head, and moving them in a circular motion perpendicular to your shoulders (think like the handles on the side of a jack-in-the-box, or, if you’re a real weirdo like me, like the handbikes from the Eliminator on American Gladiators.)

This motion is usually used to explain to someone that you are aware that you are using completely ill-conceived logic in order to explain your actions; and optionally, you can “spin the wheels” in a staggered or struggling fashion in order to more adequately communicate how silly your rationalization is.

Aside: I loved American Gladiators back in the day. In the show’s first couple of seasons, the Gladiators were Gods. Beating an American Gladiator in an event where you were on even ground (many of the events were designed to give the contender an advantage or head start) was about as likely as beating Hiroyuki Sakai (Iron Chef French) in a battle involving fish. Not Bloody Likely. Then, in Season Five, a contender named Wesley “2 Scoops” Berry exploded on the scene and shattered records with his amazing physical abilities. It was a case of the show’s greatest moment simultaneously being its downfall. To see 2 Scoops dominate the Gladiators was truly amazing, but at the same time, it made future seasons of the show much less interesting.

So, all that said, you can imagine that quite a bit of spinning is involved while trying to rationalize my enjoyment of this movie.

Just one of the Guys (hereafter referred to as JootG), if you haven’t had the, uh, privilege, stars mostly unknown actors in a story about a gal in her senior year in high school (Terry Griffith, played by Joyce Hyser) who enters an article-writing contest for a newspaper internship and her article is about her sojourn at a different high school; AS A GUY.

Yes. This is a cross-dressing movie. That’s right. To be trumped only by the infamous body-switch, the cross-dressing movie is one of the worst gimmicks from 80s movies.

She becomes a popular “guy” at the school because she’s a chick and she knows how to dress, she falls for the guy she becomes “buddies” with, she has to deflect come-ons by aggressive girls (mmkay, sluts) at the school that throw themselves at her, etc. Much comic hilarity ensues.

Why in God’s name would I find this movie not just tolerable, but in fact irresistibly entertaining?

I’m not sure. Let the wheel-spinning commence…

I guess I could say something here because despite the fact that my theater company was low-key and specialized in Improv and Sketch Comedy, I’ve done a lot of shows in my day and I do know a FEW things about “real” theater, including that Shakespeare used cross-dressing and disguises many times in his comedies. So, I suppose you could consider cross-dressing a “classic” comedic device. (*Spins wheels* …you get it now, right?)

Given that there is at least some similarity between JootG and As You Like it, if you replace Rosalind with Terry (and Orlando with Rick), I guess that lends SOME legitimacy to this; though, I haven’t seen the beginning of JootG in a long time, so I’m not sure if she initially falls in love with Rick because he beats someone in a wrestling match like Rosalind in As You Like It, so the similarities may end at the cross-dressing.

I don’t remember an early wrestling match, but I do remember several fights in the movie, and this leads me to possibly the biggest reason why I like this movie. The bit characters. I love movies with memorable bit characters, and this has one of my favorites of all time. Besides Billy Jayne, who plays Buddy, Terri’s sex-crazed virgin younger brother, and a young Sherilyn Fenn as Buddy’s eventual match, it has William Zabka in it. William Zabka, of course, was typecast in his career in the mid-80s as playing the quintessential asshole/bully character that really likes to get in fights.

Aside: I could do a whole post on my love for bit characters; but suffice it to say that it’s the bit characters that make a movie like Die Hard so much better than Under Seige. Okay, maybe the fact that Bruce Willis can act, and Steven Seagal totally can’t comes into play too… but the bit characters in Die Hard are awesome; each of them, even if they only have like 2 minutes of screen time, have their own personality and quirks. Al Leong’s character illustrates this perfectly as his only real scene is about 10 seconds when he’s getting ready for the police to break in, taking cover and stacking up ammunition for the ensuing gunfight... and he finds time to steal a couple of candy bars from the concession stand. Badass Asian dude just can't resist a Baby Ruth. Classic.

Zabka’s more famous for his (basically the same) roles in The Karate Kid movies (as Johnny), and Back to School (as Chas), but JootG has to be mentioned to make a trifecta, because a) he pretty much plays the same character in all three movies, and b) in JootG, his character actually carries around a pair of sleeveless denim gloves that he puts on when he’s going to beat someone up. I know I’m a weirdo, but that’s comic gold to me.

In another attempt to try and find a reason why I like this movie, I looked into the writing and directing credits. Lisa Gottlieb directed the movie, and there really isn’t much else that she’s done that I’m a big fan of. I never really watched Boy Meets World, and while I always considered Dream On a good series, I didn’t watch it religiously, and besides, there were like 20 directors for Dream On.

The writing credits were given to both Dennis Feldman and Jeff Franklin. Dennis Feldman, I guess, is a good sign; his credits aren’t anything amazing, but the Species movies have their fans, Real Men had James Belushi and John Ritter, decent guys, and while I don’t really like either of those movies, he did, of course, he wrote The Golden Child, which a movie that I like so much that I’ve quoted it in a post on here before.

Then there’s Jeff Franklin. He’s done a lot of TV that people will remember. Here’s a list of notables: Hangin’ with Mr. Cooper, Gimme a Break, Bosom Buddies, Laverne & Shirley, and, um, Full House. Personally, I don’t remember any of it being good, but I didn’t watch enough of a lot of it to be a true judge, well, except Full House. I was too stupid to realize that I didn’t have to watch trash back then, and I’ve seen enough Michelle cutsie shit, bad Dave Coulier impressions, very special episodes, and post-shark-jump shit like Comet the Dog and Lori Loughlin as Becky, the woman that “tamed” Uncle Jesse, to know that Full House sucks ass. Don’t agree? Two words. Kimmie Gibbler. ‘Nuff said. If you didn’t want to gag her motormouth with chloroform at some point… well… well…. I bet you liked Six from Blossom too, didn’t you… and therefore, you’re beyond hope of saving.

So, I’m not really sure what I’ve realized in my exploration of this movie. There may or may not be a Shakespeare connection. I like watching Zabka be a dickhead. I like The Golden Child. I hate Full House. I think Wesley “2 Scoops” Berry is badass. I guess that’s about it.

Maybe the real reason why I watch this movie till the end whenever I see it on is a lot more common-denominator than that.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s because the last 15 minutes of the movie shows both Zabka putting his beat-em-up gloves on and getting in a fight while he’s wearing a tux and a prom king crown, which is hilarious, and also shows the “revealing” of Terri’s true gender to her crush, Rick, who, of course, doesn’t believe her, so she (ahem) has to prove it to him by showing him her boobs on the spot, which is interesting to just about every straight guy; despite the androgyny.

So, yeah. I’m a guy.

I like boobs.

A lot.

While I'm not going to apologize for being a red-blooded male, I proffer the following in an attempt to deflect possible judgments that I'm just another shallow guy.

First, I think women are unbelievable; I have a post in the works that outlines the Top X reasons why I love being a guy, and surprisingly enough, many of those reasons have to do with the fact that I'm lucky enough to NOT have to deal with a lot of the adversity women face.

Now, I'm certainly not qualified to write a post detailing a possible solution for teaching young women how to feel good about themselves and their bodies regardless of all the shitty influences in society, so someday they can stand up and object to being used as.. an object; but I think that someone should do it. The worst part is that many women who allow themselves to be objectified, even if they themselves are confident and unaffected, are in turn used to influence other, often more impressionable and less self-confident, women, and what could've been an empowered woman becomes another slave to the beauty magazine ad stereotype; who tries to liken herself to an impossible airbrushed ideal and feels like a failure when she doesn't reach the level of look only acheived by a personal makeup team.

Anyways, this really isn't my place. (I’ll worry about this more when/if I have a daughter.)

Unlike cooking (for which I have much love) and cleaning (which I don't love, but will do), which are jobs that should never have an "assumed" gender role, I think teaching women to respect themselves is a job better suited to the softer, sweeter sex. It might be because I don't exactly have my finger on the pulse of women's movements, but I can't think of an iconic woman off the top of my head who's really making it her mission to spread that kind of message.

I still hold to my belief that as long as a woman believes in herself and takes care of herself, she has it in her to bowl over men with whom society would make her believe she had no shot.

(Of course, I'd be a liar to say that I think EVERY woman can be irresistable to any man they desire, I have to be realistic; but my point is that a LOT of the ones that think they can't be powerfully attractive are wrong.)

I don't think there is a bigger turnoff to me than a woman who's fear of a spider or snake is only trumped by her fear of a sandwich or a spring roll. "I had half a lettuce wrap and three Skittles for lunch, tee hee!" Careful. I might sneeze and break you in half. I hope you're wearing your Burberry coat with packing-foam liner; you could be damaged in transit.

Why the hell do I do this? v4.0 Musical Edition: More Masochism, Maestro

2005-12-19T00:11:00.000-05:00

So, it's already been established that in lieu of real life drama, I get my strong emotions vicariously through TV.

So, what happens when I don't need Intervention to make me depressed? What happens when I'm lonely and I start to really miss having a couch cuddle companion?

Well, what I usually do is sit at my computer and listen to music.

Aside: Now, let me preface this. I'm one of those people who simply can't describe their musical tastes. Eclectic is such an overused descriptor, so I'll use the lesser-used, yet more appropriate, term "music spaz." If you thought my guilty pleasure movies were bad.. you ain't seen (er.. heard) nothin' yet.

I don't think I've bought a CD in the last 10 years, so music for me is strictly digital. Because of the hunt-n-peck tendencies for getting music in the manner in which I get it, I have a collection of some weird and random shit, along with a lot of lame Top 40 crap that I heard on the radio and couldn't help myself.

Aside: Yes.. I get it in THAT manner... I'm a firm believer in just letting technology take its course... if technology exists to do something, you should be able to do it, and the system in place should adapt. NO, I don't think that Metallica is going to starve. If you want to know how music is going to survive, you might be surprised to know that blogs are part of the answer. I won't bore you with the same tirade on piracy as my movies post.

The thing is, when I'm depressed, I actually have playlists just for the occasion. Now, you might think that the logical thing to do might be to compile some upbeat music in a foray towards faking out the funk. But no, you read the subject of the post, so you know better. (if you didn't, quick, look now! I'll pretend I didn't notice... okay.. see it? Good.)

So, instead of listening to music that would put me in a better mood, I instead purposefully listen to a list consisting exclusively of sappy songs about love and wallow in my self-loathing.

What the hell is wrong with me?!

Why "going to the movies" is dead to me; and, oh yeah, I'm a Fantasy snob.

2005-12-16T14:51:00.000-05:00

No, I'm not saying that I'm never going to set foot in a movie theater again; I definitely am. What I am saying is that the casual activity of "seeing what's playing" and going to the movies without having a movie and showtime carefully chosen, is over for me.

This is due to the fallout from the last time I went to the movies a week or so ago.

As Ron Popeil of Ronco fame might say when using psychological manipulation on his audience when talking about the price on one of his inane inventions:

I didn't see a horrible movie, I didn't get my car stolen, I didn't get an overpriced beverage spilled on me. There weren't technical difficulties, there weren't "kid" problems, and I didn't get solicited for gay sex in the Men's room... like you might all be thinking.

Actually, the experience itself was quite pleasant. The theater was very nice, stadium seating, the parking was free, and the screen/sound were both very good.

Obligatory backstory: As I've said previously, I live in rich whiteyville. The next town over is trying to revamp their image to get more of the old money pie. As part of this effort, they built a new mall complete with a very nice, big, new, movie theater.

I was invited to go see the C.S. Lewis/Disney version of Passion of the Christ; a.k.a. The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe. I was interested, but not tremendously excited.

Big Ass Aside: Bah, I shouldn't be sippin' the Haterade on the Narnia movie; but I can't help it. I did the same thing with the Lord of the Rings movies. See, I'm a big fantasy fan. I've read a lot of fantasy books. So while I'm ecstatic that fantasy has made its way into the mainstream with serious actors, real budgets, and A-List directors; and while I understand that you have to start with the classics of the genre like Tolkein and Lewis, they're just not as interesting to me as more contemporary works. So I go, I speak with my wallet and support the fantasy movement; but all the while I'm waiting for something better.

Yeah, yeah, I know, I wouldn't have those contemporary works, I wouldn't have my beloved Dungeons & Dragons (I see you snickering!) and I wouldn't be the uber-geek that I am without Tolkein and Lewis, (and Gygax for all you old school P&P RPGers that aren't reading this).

But my problem with the seminal works of fantasy lies in the fact that they were so revolutionary. While a lot of fantasy is based on universally understood myths and legends that are centuries old, like dragons and magic, some if it was actually invented by these guys. Tolkien had to explain what orcs were so the readers would have something to get their imaginations going.

Interestingly enough, this is the very same reason why I'm not reading the Harry Potter books. Rowling makes them accessible to those who have no background in Fantasy. So while she spends time explaining what a Hippogryph is, I already knew.

The books I'm used to reading have built upon those foundations of Tolkien, Lewis, et al, and have had countless permutations and complexities added over the years; which is why I'm upset if I see a dragon that's not red (or gold) breathing fire, when (insert retainer-wearing nerd voice) according to D&D lore, a black dragon, for example, spits acid instead of breathing fire. So, until they make a high-quality movie or TV series out of Weis and Hickman's fantastic DragonLance series; specifically their Chronicles and Legends trilogies, my snobby-geek ass is not going to truly be satisfied.

So, yeah, I was like, "eh, I guess I'll go" to the Narnia invite. So I went. And as I hinted at before, the movie wasn't horrible; I enjoyed it. It was a heck of a lot more violent than I thought a PG movie would be; not that I need movies to be violent for me to enjoy them, but if you're going to show that sometimes you have to fight, and there are some things worth fighting for, it should be shown realistically, and thankfully, it was. (The only movie/TV show that's allowed to have giant battles where no one really gets hurt is G.I. Joe)

So I guess directors can get away with violent and scary imagery if they can sell to the censors that it's "meant to be jarring and emotional," and well, (spoiler alert, skip to the next paragraph) if it's implied that all the things that died didn't ACTUALLY die... and all the greivously wounded people turn out fine... I guess that helps....

So why am I swearing off the casual moviegoing experience?

Two words.

Ten. Fifty.

As in, $10.50.

As in, ten dollars and fifty cents as the price of admission.

As in, approximately 60% of the price of the DVD of the movie when it comes out on Amazon.

Alright, I know I sound like the old guy who's got the little kid by the ear explaining to him for the eleventy-billionth time how he had to walk to school when he was a kid, uphill both ways, in the snow, with no feet.

But $10.50 is highway robbery. If we had to pay for parking at this place too, I would've gone ape-shit and jumped the counter; filled up one of those diabetic-shock-sized soda cups with nacho cheese, and done a paint-can-style wide-arcing fling-smear on of those enormous 10-hours-to-put-together cardboard standees.

$10.50. Those rat bastards...

And I know what you're thinking...

Piracy Shmiracy. The MPAA uses a blanket estimate of all movie downloads, and equates that to lost revenue. The truth of the matter is that a lot of people that download a movie ALSO pay to see it, and a lot of people that download a movie that DON'T pay to see it never would've paid to see it even if they couldn't download it.

But, because going out to the movies with friends is one of the few activities that will get me out of the house, I have to reach a compromise.

I have one of those Entertainment books and I'll be sending away for the discounted movie tickets.

I still might do the nacho-cheese fling though. Those punks deserve it.

Life is your restaurant...

2005-12-06T21:30:00.000-05:00

....And I'm your Maitre'D.

It was funnier when it happened to Joey in Friends...

2005-12-04T03:13:00.000-05:00

And just when I thought my life was too boring for drama....

Okay, here's the obligatory overblown TMI (too much information) set up. Sorry, but I'm stickler for having people I'm telling stories to know the whole deal. So, while I'm not going to give histories and back stories to everything, I am going to be relatively thorough.

(Warning: After writing this post, this one might be even longer than the frozen dinner one. My apologies, but I needed to get some of this stuff outta me.)

My closest group of friends from high school all stuck around the town where we grew up after failing out of, transfering, or (gasp!) completing college; at least for a couple of years. Within the last few years, most of them have moved away. One lives in Manhattan, two are in Las Vegas, and me and another stayed in waspy rich whiteville.

So, obviously, since everyone else has moved away, my and this other friend spend more time with each other and have gotten to be closer friends. To augment our friend circle, we've hooked up with some more fringe friends from high school, and have subsequently grown closer to them.

I was closer to this fringe group than my other friend, but I've since brought him into the fold.

Initially, when we first started hanging out with this new group of friends, I had a crush on one of the girls, who happened to be the sister of one of the guys in the group that was one of these formerly fringe friends.

As we got to know each other, I realized that this was only really a physical crush; her personality wasn't all that stimulating to me, and well, contrary to popular belief, that means a whole heckuva lot to me, so I sort of mentally checked out of serious interest in her. She's a really flirty person, which can be flattering at first, but that's not a trait I'd want in someone I'd want to be involved with for something serious, and, since I only really look for something serious, she was pretty much out.

Besides, if you're going to get involved with a friend's sister, you better fucking be serious about it, and not be all, "Well, sorry man, I just really wanted to fuck her, not date her. You understand, right?" I don't have a sister, so I can't totally relate, but I can imagine, and what I'm imagining is NOT a world where wanton urges serve as adequate justification for a sexual soire with a sibling of a friend.

Aside: That, and she just doesn't have anything she's really "into." I mean, given that about half of my passions are stereotypically "guy" things, (computers, gaming, and basketball being that half; while theater, cooking, and good stuff on the glowing box tends to be the more girl-friendly half), it's typical that I'll need some "me" time to devote to those passions; and if my prospective partner doesn't have her own particular passions, which, after asking her, she apparently doesn't, well, there can be a gap; and that gap can turn into resentment, and the resentment turns into me sacrificing my passions to close the gap, which turns into me resenting the fact that I'm making a sacrifice that's not being reciprocated... yuck.. anyways..

(If you couldn't read between the lines. this was a pretty big point of contention with my last relationship. Now, it wasn't like I wanted something crazy. Just one or two nights a week to do my thing, and the occasional binge when something new and great came out, but anyways...)

So the preface is, in a nutshell, I had a crush, but it was totally over with.

So.. fast forward a couple months. My friend, who was from the initial group of close friends from high school, doesn't have the same "over-analysis of everyone because each prospective female needs to pass the 'will I still want to be with her in a year?' test" issue that I have. (jesus, I'm such a woman I should fucking read Cosmo, what with their "is he really the one?" and "is he cheating?" tests and whatnot... sheesh.)

Nor does this friend have the "aversion to starting a relationship with someone he doesn't really care about that he knows is probably going to end badly for many reasons not the least of which is because he's the sister of another friend" issue.

Add this to the fact that this friend of mine is one of the better looking guys in our group, and you can guess that my buddy and this sister of another friend start flirting, and, eventually, hook up. It's important to note that I did not witness this hook up, and the friend called me up and told me about it. Given my previous crush, I think this was the prudent thing to do on his part. He was just making sure it was okay with me; and it was.

There might have been a twinge of jealousy, because of course I find this woman attractive, and I now knew that my friend experienced a thing or two that I had wanted to do, but I definitely was cool with it. I spent enough time with her to know that I don't want to be with her in any meaningful way, and the only thing that bothered me was that I knew my friend didn't either but was willing to play the "this is just a casual thing," game with her so he could see the naughty parts. I thought that was a bit disrespectful to the brother of this girl.

Fast forward another couple of months. A big group of us go out bowling (yes, there's nothing to do if you aren't into bars and clubs, so we occasionally play the sport of suburban rednecks); and, after returning, there's speculation about maybe going somewhere or doing something. I realize that the only people interested are my friend, the sister, and myself. My car is at the friend's place. Knowing about the previous pool hookup, and the heavy flirting going on that evening between the two, I knew better, and feigned tiredness. The three of us drive back to his place, I get in my car and go home. I hear later from my friend that it was just some more first-basey kind of shit, she doesn't "come upstairs for coffee."

Fast forward another couple of months. I haven't heard anything from my friend about him and the sister, and I start to wonder if maybe they're doing more and my friend is trying to, "do me a favor," by not telling me, since despite me making it clear I was fine with his other encounters with this woman, he thought I'd get upset to know that he was dunking his cookie in the glass of milk that I was previously eyeing. It seems a bit silly, but not out of the question, so I keep my eyes open.

Over the next couple of months, I start a workout regiment with the friend who's the sister's brother, and we workout in his basement. (I'm not a workout kind of guy, but it's a no-pressure environment, and it keeps me from needing a rag-on-a-stick to wash myself) So me and another (not meaningful to this story) friend go over this guy's house 4 days a week to lift weights with the brother and his dad.

Since I see this guy, and he still lives with his parents (yes, a lot of us do.. it's unbelievably expensive to live in this area) I therefore see the sister more often. I have a couple of lengthy conversations with her. There was no ulterior motive here, (well, not at first); if I can get the ear of a female, I'll take it; it's purely a Bounty quicker-picker-upper moment, meaning I'll take information about how females think and act any time I can get it; even from ones that I'm not really interested in. Knowledge is power, right?

So, as we have more and more conversations, we inevitably talk a lot about my buddy who hooked up with her in the pool. Now's where I get an ulterioir motive. Despite me giving her EVERY opportunity to tell me, and saying everything short of asking her directly, she carefully and deliberately avoids saying that she has seen or done anything with my friend beyond talking on the phone, pretty infrequently even; she even goes so far as to talk pretty negatively about him. We definitely talk more about my friend's faults and what he might be able to do to correct them, rather than his strengths; and it's harped on several times about how she's not really interested in my friend, and that she doesn't "do" casual relationships, and she's only hooked up with a guy "like once ever." (Um, O RLY?)

This gets me really thinking. In the course of any one of these two-hour conversations, you reveal a lot about yourself; I talked a lot about my issues finding companionship given my distain for the bar/club scene, and my desire to find someone more like me, who would be at home doing the same stupid shit I do and not meeting anyone; and she, well, she tried to avoid revealing anything meaningful about herself. She was like, yeah, blah blah blah my ex boyfriend was a dick even though I was great to him, why can't more people be like me, a.k.a. perfect? (Again, O RLY?)

So anyways, after her vehement denial of doing anything with my friend, (and of course I knew about the pool, and the parking lot), I start to wonder again if my friend is doing this girl, and, a) not telling me, and b) telling HER not to tell me either.

Fast forward to this past Wednesday. I call up my buddy on my way home from work, asking him what the deal was with the Knicks game.

(This guy and I are both big Knicks fans, even though they stink, and we watch most games together, enough that it would be understood that we would probably watch this game together.)

My buddy picks up the phone, a little out of breath, and says, a) he just got out of the shower, and, b) he was just going to watch the game at home himself.

My Spider-Sense is going bonkers. I know something's up. How do I know this? Here's a brief rundown:

I've been friends with this guy for over 10 years. I know him cold, and as cliche as it is, this just wasn't like him.
I ate lunch with him that afternoon, and we had discussed the game already; we were actually going to get tickets and go see the game at MSG; so seeing it on TV together was the next logical step.
I knew what time he got out of work, and he did NOT have time to go get all sweaty and have just gotten out of the shower by the time I called him.
Despite the reputation of the Communications program at a lot of colleges being some bullshit that jocks take, I actually paid attention, had good professors, and learned a lot. You pick up a sense of how people think and talk, and there were like four inconsistencies with the way he was talking to me.

I had very deep suspicions, and I'm REALLY big on truth and honesty. So, here's where things get a little dicey. I was already driving, and his house is awfully close to mine. I definitely could've just gone home and let the suspicion eat at me, but I thought, man, I bet she's over there right now, and he just totally lied to me. He's out of breath, well, because... you know. So, I do the shady thing. I drive by his place, looking at the cars.

A car matching her make, model, and color is in the parking lot outside his place.

I memorize the license plate JUST IN CASE; because I sure don't want to be wrong if I were to bring it up later.

Fast Forward, for the last time, to tonight. We go over the brother's house for a little get together, poker night, etc.

The sister's out at the bars/clubs, (yet another reason why she's not for me) but her car's there. It's definitely the same car, same license plate. He lied. She lied.

My buddy had picked me up that night since parking can be tight at our friend's place, so we're walking to the car, and I gotta break the news.

Truth and Honesty are pretty much #1 with me, even though it's a double-edged sword. On one hand, someone who's close to me will know that I won't lie to them, and if you're with me, I'll never, ever, EVER cheat on you. On the other hand, a) if something's bothering me that is going to hurt your feelings, I have a lot of trouble keeping it to myself, and b) if I think something fishy's going on, I want to know the whole truth about it. Things like that just eat at me, and I can't function without saying something.

We hashed it out on the ride home, and you know, I'm totally fine with the fact that he's shtooping the girl I used to have a crush on, I'm just upset that he lied about it, and told her to lie about it too. He played it off, saying shit like he thought I already kind of knew. (to which I asked him why he didn't just say "I'm busy" or "I got someone over" on Wednesday...)

But whatever, him and I are really close, this isn't going to mess up our friendship in the long run. But, as I said before, I have to be honest with people, and if people aren't honest with me, that's an issue. I'm over it with him already, and I always forgive, but I rarely forget. It's just one more thing that I know that helps me understand where I really stand with him.

On the other hand, I still needed to square away things with the sister. I had opened up a lot, and said some things that you only really say when there's a quid pro quo situation; and now, I know for SURE that a lot of those things she was saying were pretty far from the truth; either that, or she's only banging my buddy because he's a good looking guy.

So, I'm not going to be able to look her in the eye until this shit is discussed between the two of us.

I talked to my buddy about this, and I told him my feelings, but I said, hey, you're my friend, and if you REALLY don't want me to say anything to her, I won't. I do NOT want to do that, but I respect your wish in that case.

Aside: I might not do that for all of my friends, but this guy really is a good guy, he's done some really great things for me over the years, and to be honest, him and I had similar "just be a really great guy" philosophies on women until he went to college and joined a fraternity. The geniuses there told him that if he was sick of not having control over every situation with women, he could fix that by being cocky and aloof towards women; act like you don't want them, play games, etc. Of course, some women, being, um, women, and for reasons I still don't quite understand, totally went for that, which encouraged him some more; such that now he tries to be the ladies man who's got it all together in most social situations.

So, he understood, and said that I can do what I needed to make things right with the sister. Now, make things right might just mean that after talking to her about it I realize that I don't really want to talk with her so much anymore, but that remains to be seen. I'm really curious to see what she's going to say when she finds out that I figured out their little secret lover crap.

(Hehe, you know I totally ruined a little bit of the fun they were having... what with the whole excitement of "no one knows" and all that crap...)

Now, that leaves the brother. I see the brother 4 days a week to work out, plus any weekend activities. Now, I think he'll probably be okay with this, (he dated the sister of one of our other friends at some point, so it's not like he can get all uppity and self-righteous) and he probably had suspicions of his own, but it's going to itch at me until he knows too. Which leads me to the current conflict I'm having.

I mean, I dunno, I guess I have a such a big problem with lying, that it irritates me REALLY bad to see it going on when I know the truth; and the little self-policeman is raising a stink in my head now.

How much of this is really "my business?"

I think it's my business to deal with the friend who lied to me. And it's my business to deal with the sister who repeatedly lied to me during sensitive conversations.

Beyond that, I'm not so sure. Am I a total spaz for wanting to be the truth police? I mean, I'm allowed to expect honesty out of my friends, right? But where does that right to spread the truth end? Personally, I think the right ends at the circle of people who would possibly have a care about it one way or the other; but my thoughts and what's socially acceptable may or may not be the same thing.

Holy Shnikes. It's 5:40am. Well, at least I got this off my chest.

If you made it this far, you get a gold star.

Then put your little hand in mine....

2005-11-28T02:48:00.000-05:00

there ain't no hill or mountain we can't climb....

Groundhog Day.

On the surface, I think this is a "good" movie because it has good writing, a great comic actor, Bill Murray, some good supporting roles, and a unique premise.

I'm a big fan of movies and books that portray a "normal" world where everything is consistent with the reality in which we all dwell, except for a little twist.

I dig this concept pretty much however it's conceived, whether the twist comes from: a technological advance, like in Jurassic Park; a discovery, like in Congo or Sphere (mmkay, so I like Michael Crichton, and I mean the BOOKS, because apparently someone always decides to put a few spoonfuls of crap into the mix when they turn his sci-fi books into movies) or the introduction of some element of fantasy or science fiction, as in the Anne Rice Vampire Chronicles (Interview with the Vampire, et al.) or Piers Anthony's Incarnations of Immortality.

Aside: That last one is actually a pretty decent series. Not the toughest reads in the world in terms of sophistication of prose, but then again, neither are J.K. Rowlings' books and well, I think it's the understatement of the decade to say that those books have a "solid following." Anyways, the first one is On a Pale Horse, and introduces the premise that there are individuals who are the incarnations of, and therefore have the responsibility of governing, such far-reaching parts of life as Nature, War, Fate, Time, Good, Evil, and, as the title of the first book in the series hints, Death. Some of the books are hit or miss, but the ones on Death and Evil are both very enjoyable; as a very human face is put on some of the elements of life that are most feared and hated.

Aside-to-the-Aside: (Yes, I can do that, it's my blog damnit!) Or maybe I just liked those books best because I first read them in my angsty teenage years when me and some of my friends wore trenchcoats to high school. Yeah, we beat those Columbine punks to the "Trenchcoat Mafia" idea by a long shot, and they had to go give angsty kids who play Dungeons & Dragons and video games a bad name!

I tell you what, and this comes from a hardcore Star Wars geek, Anthony does a hell of a better job of illustrating a "fall from grace" than Lucas's effort at portraying Anakin's transformation into Darth Vader. I'm putting another post on the back burner that's all about my love for the "sympathetic" villian; it's hard to do right, but man, when it's good, it's REALLY good. While I thought Episode III was the best of the (bad) prequels, you can imagine my disappointment with Lucas when it's like, "Alright Hayden, now, in this scene, right after you just attacked Mace Windu, you're going to uh.. just start being REALLY bad. You were conflicted before, but now, what the hell, you're just an evil sonuvabitch." Sigh.

Anyways, prior to that tangent extraordinaire, I think I was talking about Groundhog Day, and that on the surface, I love it for: a) being funny (Harold Ramis is a comedic badass), and for, b) being a normal world with a little twist.

Under the surface, however, I love it for a different reason; and this is the real reason why it makes my list of movies that I'm compelled to watch when I see it's on.

I love this movie because part of me wants to be able to bowl over a woman with such powerful perfection. But, as it's portrayed in the movie, perfection isn't always what it seems to be. The days that Phil spends lavishing attention on Rita, where he has everything she loves laid out for her; the typical definition of showing a woman "the perfect night," those are the days he only gets so far before he creeps her out and gets smacked in the face. Phil finally succeeds when he completes his change into being a genuinely great person to everyone, and, it's when Rita sees that, she ultimately falls for him.

Even though he learns EVERYTHING about her, it's not the fact that he knows she loves Rocky Road and French poetry; it isn't that knowledge that empowers him. He learns that he loves her because she's an amazing person and is so kind to others; (he tells her this when she's half-asleep after the card-tossing-into-the-hat scene. And yes, I just saw it, so I'm not a total freak and have the movie memorized) and it's his own transformation into a person that cares for other people that seals the deal.

So, if you're ridiculously overanalyzing the movie like I am right now, you draw the conclusion that you don't need the eternity that Phil had to show someone that you're what they're looking for; or, if you do, you don't need to spend it on her, you need to spend it on you.

A "Very Special" Episode of My Blog

2005-11-22T17:07:00.000-05:00

I sort of made a pact with myself that I wouldn't use this blog to talk about specific detailed updates and accounts of and on relationships that I may or may not be having. I want this to be a place where I could try and figure myself out, and hopefully find a kindred spirit or two out there by pontificating on my personal quirks and idiosynchracies.

Of course, because I just wrote that preface, you know I'm a little iffy about my adherence to that rule vis a vis the forthcoming post.

But don't worry, this isn't going to be a cryfest, what happened was actually a happy event.

Here we go with preamble #2...

I'm a long term relationship guy. I'm not really interested in spending time with, (and serious emotional currency on), someone unless I get to know them first, and if I like them as a friend, I can then make the decision that I want to (or not) take the next step; if I do, I'm in it for the long haul. When I say long haul, I mean that I can count all my relationships on one hand, from high school to now; and more than half of those relationships have been for 2 years or more.

This sounds all well and good right? I'm not afraid to commit, (but I kind of am... more on that some other time), but for a modern guy in the modern dating world, this is probably not the smartest idea, because I therefore have no "in-between game" where you can be friendly with someone, but still be "dating." I tend to skip that part and elongate the other parts, namely, the "tension-filled, before anything major has happened" phase and the "we spend so much time with each other it's enough to make others nauseous" phase.

Being with someone for several years, I obviously get very emotionally attached, and it's hard for me to really feel like I have a clean slate after a break-up. It takes me a long time before I stop thinking about an ex consciously; and I don't really ever forget anyone completely.

It's not like I wax nostalgic on all the good times, nor do I long to be back together with that person; it's just that when you're with someone for a long time, a little bit of them just becomes a part of you, and certain things that you experience in life just become associated with that person, even after their gone.

Here's an illustrantion. My buddy, who was engaged back in college, forever associates the smell of chlorine with his ex-fiance, since she swam competitively while they were dating in high school and college.

So, to review...

1) I'm a long term relationship guy.

2) It takes me a long time to get over a woman I was with for more than 2 years, even if the break up was mutual and necessary.

So, what happened to me, and how does this become a happy post??

I bumped into my last girlfriend (I don't want to call her my ex.. it's been a long time, and she's moved on, so it's not really like that) the other day, and normally, when something like this happens, if we talk on the phone or exchange emails or whatever, even though the conversation is totally amiable and we laugh and everything is sort of water under the bridge, (and even though I know our relationship needed to end when it did for both our sakes), I tend to dwell on it the rest of the day, and think about my issues and start questioning whether I'm a decent human being or not... blah blah.

But the other day, I was fine. It was totally okay, I didn't dwell on the meeting any more than being happy about knowing that all the wounds had healed.

I've definitely felt "over" (I hate using that word, though, it doesn't seem appropriate) my last relationship for a long time now, but it just felt good to have the waters get tested and come out feeling good about the whole thing.

Why the hell do I do this? Episode III: I am TV Masochist.

2005-11-11T00:25:00.000-05:00

TV Masochist: (n.) One who purposely watches television programs (esp. reality shows) that contain elements that make one feel upset, perhaps to somehow replace one's lack of feeling or otherwise boring life with a safe experience of extreme emotion.

All you reality show haters out there, well, sorry, but when it comes to reality TV, I often get hooked. I guess I'm into the vicarious living. (Cindy's got a great blog, by the way, and posts a hell of a lot more often than me)

Here's a few shows, in no particular order, that range from me being hugely devoted to(read: TiVo Season Pass, never miss an episode, even when I do I download it off the Internet), or the show at least at some point moved me.

Aside: Now, this certainly doesn't embody all the TV I watch, (boy is that a scary preamble..) but this list includes all the shows that I remember finding myself getting teary at. And yes, I'm a guy and I cry at the TV when no one else is around. I'll never successfully feign machoness, so I might as well embrace the fact that I'm a sensitive doughboy.

The Amazing Race
Survivor
Intervention
The First 48
30 Days
The Apprentice
The Contender
Extreme Makeover: Home Edition
The Biggest Loser
Eco-Challenge
Joe Schmo
American Idol
The Ultimate Fighter

And unfortunately, the list doesn't end there. I don't know what it is, but if someone's on TV and there's real emotions involved, they can get me goin'. I've been known to get into such crap as Wife Swap and Boot Camp. It's pretty sad.

Aside: If the show is an "elimination" type of show that has seasons and a real episode order, I tend to follow my normal M.O. for watching fictional TV Shows, which is to binge on these shows. I watch several episodes back-to-back in a sitting. Of course, you need a TiVo or other DVR, or a large collection of shows on your computer or on DVD to do this, but it's my favorite way to get my fix. :)

Now, you may recall that I had a disclaimer for the "reality show haters" in the beginning. Why do some people just hate reality shows? Now, there certainly are some shows that are ill-conceived at best, and blatantly bad rip-offs at worst, but if a show can convince me that the people involved are really emotionally changed, I get into it.

Holy Crap This is a Huge Aside: You also might recall that I put Joe Schmo up there as one of the shows. This definitely wasn't a popular show, it was on Spike TV, and the premise was a sort of "Truman Show" spin: They made a fake "live in a house and do stupid shit while trying not to get eliminated" reality show, with all actors playing stereotypical reality show people, like "The Bitch," "The Gay Guy," "The Asshole," etc, Except forone guy, who was a real guy thinking he was on a reality show.

For that guy, they went and found the nicest, most unassuming, naive, yet charmingly sincere guy they could find. They really couldn't have picked a better guy.

Now, you'd think that the show would be all about this guy and his emotional roller coaster as the show was SO over-the-top doing crazy things to mess with this guy's head, and the actors were playing such wacked characters that he might be suspecting that something wasn't right. And for the most part, that was what the show was about; and that stuff was VERY interesting.

But what it really came down to that made the show great was that all of the actors, writers, and staff just totally fell in love with this guy, and the people that were scripted to do mean things to him really didn't want to, the actors that were his "friends" really became really close with him, it was really great stuff. If you haven't seen it, it's definitely worth it.

Anyways, getting back to the topic of the post; the biggest tearjerker on the list for me has to be Intervention. Seeing people hit rockbottom is emotionally jarring, and makes me appreciate what I have, but at the same time reminds me of how sheltered I am.

I've never been really addicted to anything, and to see these people give up everything that they care about to get high; it's hypnotic. I'm glad that they keep it real (sigh, can't believe I used that phrase) and show the people that punk out on the Interventions too. It keeps with the show's theme about being brutally honest.

Aside: Crystal Meth is FUCKED UP. Just about every other show has some young guy or gal who's f'd up on Crystal Meth, and they just don't care about anything else; they're totally different people.

Well, at least my pantheon of emotion by osmosis is only limited to reality shows. At least I'm not watching soap operas, or soap operas for men, also known as professional wrestling. And at least I'm not watching Merideth Baxter Birney movies on Lifetime about strung-out women that get abused and have to stand trial about something usually involving a baby.

Off to bed now; but this weekend I'll probably binge out on Survivor or The Amazing Race. I have about 6 episodes of each sitting on my TiVo. So no spoiling! :D

On Popularity, and the genesis of Frange

2005-10-23T00:10:00.000-04:00

Alright... it strikes again... just finished watching the second half of "Can't Hardly Wait."

Again.

Whenever you're done laughing and pointing... read on.

Aside: After writing this; this is a long one. Go put that frozen meal in the oven now... you know.. the one that you haven't eaten because it tastes like crap if you microwave it but it takes like an hour to cook in the oven... that one. It's gonna be a while.

In my opinionated... umm.. opinion... they make these kinds of movies, and more importantly, they succeed despite being fluff, because we all relate to them in some way.

Now, of course I know how I relate to this movie. I was Preston. I was the geeky kid that always knew that if only I could "get in," I would be a great guy for a great girl. I saw beautiful girls that I had big crushes on just get crapped on by indifferent stereotypical jock types.

Aside: Of course, being a high-school aged kid, (and despite being, at least what I thought was pretty bright for my age,) I didn't always know who the "great girl" was; and truth be told, I often would think that unless I had distinct evidence to the contrary.. the "hot" girl was also the "great" girl. I've learned since then that almost all women have it in them to make themselves irresistably attractive to a guy who's curious about them... if they want to. :)

Now, though I just kind of made a stab at it, what makes girls (or guys for that matter) popular?

Since last time I checked, I wasn't a girl, nor was I girl when I was in high school, the only person I have extensive knowledge on is myself, so pardon me while I replace what should be some quoted social science research results with another nostalgic recollection that likely suffers greatly from exaggeration.

As I've said in one of my few previous posts, I grew up (and actually still live) in a very affluent town. The one public high school in town gets a LOT of funding, and is truly an amazing place.

Aside: To put this in perpective, the "Student Center," which basically is a multi-purpose area that serves as a cafeteria, place to socialize, and sort of the "center" of the school; is a one-acre square with a fifty foot tall ceiling.

Combine such a large socializing area, and many students (2500 or so when I went there, about 2700 now) and you can imagine that the clique formation is ridiculous.

So much so, that you can be really popular in your little microcosm... but still be a "nobody" as far as the whole school was concerned.

Weird huh?

So basically, even if you were a total geek, a bespectacled skinny kid who played Dungeons & Dragons and video games at every opportunity, (ahem, *cough* me *cough*), and growing up as a geek, you grew to despise popularity and doing things just to be popular, you could still find friends.

So, I had found my clan of fellow geeks, and unbelievably, we had girls that wanted to hang out with us too.

Aside: If only we knew how lucky we were, that at that particular (magical) moment in time, groups of girls would actually seek out guys.. and have their standards so low so as to find the group of self-esteem challenged misfits to which I belonged (that were members of the school's *retrospective snicker* "Strategy Club") acceptable guys to hang out with, and inevitably, go out with.

So, being the Preston-like kid I was, whenever I wasn't playing video games or Dungeons & Dragons, I was dwelling on the fact that, as much as I loved my friends, I wanted a friend to love.

Nature threw me a bone; I went from being a 5'8" skinny kid to a 6'2" not-so-skinny kid, in less than two years during high school; and looked decidedly less like your prototypical dorkus-maximus as a result.

I embraced theater as a new passion, especially comedy. I had always been a pretty funny guy, doing impressions pretty well, and though I wasn't a "thespian" (we actually had a "thespian" club that you needed to be invited to get into) I would be featured in the school's Improv shows regularly as the resident character comedian.

Aside: If you've actually read my previous posts, you can see how my aforementioned, but-now-defunct, theater company started; it was some of my buddies and I from the Improv Troupe that wanted to do summer theater.

So......

Me not looking like Urkel + Being relatively funny = Popularity

Popularity + Girls that didn't have other, better looking, guy friends = Get the Girl

I got the girl.

She was hot.

I lost my freaking mind.

My first "real" girlfriend (I'm not counting the kissing on the playground and passing notes girlfriends in elementary school, or the fake "wedding" ceremony after school girlfriends in Middle School) was an odyssey that spanned 4 years of on again-off again mental peaks and valleys. Being such a sheltered kid, I was the goody-goody that didn't want to smoke or drink or try pot or anything; doing stupid crap that might get me in trouble was something I just steered clear of, and I was pretty harsh on people, especially my friends, who did that stuff.

But there was no way I stood even a ghost of a chance against a certain vice when I was 16, with all the hormones that come with it, and my girlfriend was cute and actually wanted me.

Aside: You hear talk about guys not being able to think with the head on their shoulders when another head is involved; well... the ominous "they" (who apparently hold dominion over the world as we know it), are right.

Things might have been great, if she didn't have a little compulsive lying problem, wasn't the impulsive ying to my methodical yang, and I wasn't so helplessly attached to her and the high I got from her when things were good, that I didn't even realized the depth of the hole (read: mindfuck) that I was in.

Aside: Damn that lack of self-esteem; I really thought that I had no chance to get any other girl; and to this day, I have issues trying to "break the ice" with a girl. I have no idea how to say in a non-creepy way that I'm a totally decent guy that wants more than anything just to make a woman smile a real smile, and have it be all my fault.

Anyways... I could go on for far too many therapy sessions on my high school sweetheart.

Back to the topic at hand. Popularity.

So, within my clique, I was popular. I was the funny guy in the group. I even got a nickname that was a spoof on my last name: "Frange." I was even referred to as "The Frange" often, like I was the Fonz from Happy Days. It felt really good... I didn't even have to jump a motorcycle over a tank of sharks to keep my friends.

But... beyond my circle of friends, large as it was, and the people that saw my Improv Shows, nobody knew me.

Now; you might say, "Naw... you just didn't think people knew you.. they did."

Well, naw.. they didn't.

Fast Forward to end of Senior year, I'm anxious to pick up my yearbook, since Seniors get a bigger picture and you can put a quote under it. Silly sounding now, but it was a big deal back then.

I get my yearbook, and my last name is the same as one of my friends instead of my own, and my quote is completely missing.

Ouch.

The reimbursment of my yearbook purchase price, and a stack of little stickers with my right name and quote to hand out to people just didn't cut it for me.

Why was I so upset?

The people who mattered, my friends, they got the stickers and they knew. Why did I care about all the 400+ other people in my graduating class?

I realized, I cared about being popular. Not just popular to my friends, but popular to everyone. I wanted to at least cling to some possibility that people knew me, and when, in ten years, (yikes, which is next year) they glance at their yearbook and know who I was.

When I look back at my yearbook now, I'm completely indifferent about people that weren't my friends. I mean sure, I have memories about a lot of the people in there, but when I put the shoe on the other foot, I realize that no one gives a crap about me; and if anything, my strange circumstance of having my (wrong) last name be out of alphabetical order on the page, and my lack of quote might actually draw MORE attention to me than it would if everything were in place as it should've been.

But why should I care?

Why do we care about crap like this? Why do people get their proverbial collective panties up in a bunch about people we have so little contact with? I know I go way out of my way so that someone like a waiter at a restaurant doesn't think I'm an asshole.

Super-Sized Aside: I know this is totally off-topic... like I stay on topic ever... but I have it on good authority from a lot of ladies out there that women as a whole do NOT like the word "panties," to the point where some women rank it up there with the "C" word, which is almost universally a hated word by females. Anyone want to sound off to confirm or deny this? And if it's true.. why the hell are some female underwear still called panties?? I mean, you ladies have like 10 different names for underwear..what with your thongs and your g-strings and your boy shorts and whatnot.... why not just do away with the word completely?

I don't know if I have an answer. On some level, it's an extension of the common courtesy thing. If I can do a little thing here or there to make a few more smiles and have people think that I'm a nice guy, I'm going to do it. While I don't really subscribe to superstition, my personality happens to be a classic Leo; I really like to be liked, and I like pleasing others as well.

But when it becomes more like you're really going out of your way for something so miniscule.. well... I really don't know.

All I know is that now that I'm part of corporate America, popularity has a whole new meaning, and having people at the office like you can actually result in good things career wise.

But I didn't want to be in with the popular people at work. There's a clique at work that includes the president and her catty tag-alongs... and I just didn't want to be a part of them, even though cracking jokes with the president of the company would be a good move for my career... I just didn't have it in me.

So here I am again, with the geeks of the company. I don't think there's a girl in it for me this time though, at least not at work.

Thanks for reading, and enjoy your frozen meal. : )

Why the hell do I do this? Part Deux

2005-10-01T02:25:00.000-04:00

Alright; so I'm a guy, I like guy things... mostly. I'm a giant computer game nerd, I like watching sports, I play Basketball, etc.

But... Sigh, every once in a while, I catch myself watching... er...um... "chick flicks."

Now, some of these movies are damn good movies, and as a guy who's at least somewhat comfortable with being sensitive, I have no shame in admitting that I enjoy these movies.

An example of this kind of movie would be "Love Actually." This is a chick flick, but it's really damn good, so good that it's able to grab a guy who gives it a chance and keep him entranced even through the ending that's so unbelievably feel-good that normally I'd want to make a snide remark; but I just can't... it's just so magical. : )

Now... Unfortunately, you may have noted that I said some of these movies are damn good movies. Others.. well... not so much.

An example of this kind of movie would be "The Cutting Edge." This is also a chick flick, and I dunno how, (I'm starting to think demonic incantations in the soundtrack) but I somehow have to watch this movie everytime it's on.

To put into perspective just how "sac-masculinous" this latest instance of being put under the evil spell of TCE is, I offer this tidbit of information:

I dunno how many of you folks out there are baseball fans, but a very serious game between the Yankees and the Red Sox just ended; with all kinds of drama and playoff implications and all that guy stuff that I'm into.

One would expect that I, as a red-blooded guy, would be glued to this game for its entirety, ignoring all proverbial "golden calf" distractions, and in cases of extreme fanatical devotion, ignore even the ultimate temptation, sex, in favor of watching this game.

So why in God's name did I miss large chunks of this very important game because I was flipping back to being helplessly entranced by the prospect of watching, for like the TENTH TIME, D.B. Sweetney and Moira Kelly trade verbal quips (and AAHH! Figure Skate!!!) in a poor adaptation of the Bard's Taming of the Shrew?!

What the Hell is wrong with me?!?!

And, even more disturbing, why wasn't I smart enough to TiVo the Yankee Game while simultaneously indulging in my guilty pleasure?

Speaking of poor retellings of Taming of the Shrew.. I also can't help but watch "10 Things I Hate About You" (same movie, but with Julia Styles instead of Moira Kelly, and with approximately 98% less Figure Skating) when it's on either.

Maybe I have a thing for bad Shakespeare remakes.

Anyways, I know I'm not alone in having horrible guilty pleasure movies.

Another that makes the list for me is "Airborne," about a high school surfer from California who has to live with his cousin Wiley (pre-famous Seth Green) in cold-ass Cincinnati; which is not really a bad chick flick... it's just a bad flick.

But it has a guy and a girl and stuff so it doesn't fit into the other categories of guy bad-movie guilty pleasures; which are:

1) really bad war movies like anything with Dolph Lundgren, and

2) just about any sports movie, ranging from the good (Rudy, The Natural, Bull Durham) to the really bad like Unnecessary Roughness, about a Texas University football team that has to completely rebuild when all their players are suspended for steroids, so a rag-tag team consisting of horrible stereotypes, Kathy Ireland as the female soccer player who's the team's kicker, Sinbad, as the hip professor that still had a year of eligibilty left, and Scott Bakula as the 35 year old high school football star that had to work his family's farm so he never got to play in college.

Yeah. So I like bad movies. Blame it on me getting a really bad case of mononucleosis in High School, and the only hours I was awake during the day happened to be the time when the only movies on HBO/Cinemax/The Movie Channel were The Next Karate Kid (starring a pre-famous Hilary Swank) and sigh.. Sidekicks (starring a post-famous Pat "Noriyuki" Morita, and Jonathan Brandis)

Alright... I'll stop before I put people to sleep.

Why the hell do I do this?

2005-09-29T04:07:00.000-04:00

Despite my complete and utter irresponsibility in updating this blog, I still have the feeling that this is the first of many-a-post with this kind of title; which, of course, is a rhetorical question asking "do other people do this too?" which, of course, is a cry for justification of my own sorry-ass behavior.

Ahem, so, that said; let's get right into the latest iteration of one of my favorite acts of utter stupidity.

The company I work for (yes, I "work for the man, ev'ry night and day") is having their annual conference this week, which means that I have a whole week of 12 hour days, much of which is spent with me standing and doing menial tasks becoming of your typical twenty-something in Corporate America.

Operative phrase in the previous paragraph is "whole week of 12 hour days." Said 12-hour days begin at about 7:30am.

...are you thinking what I'm thinking? Are you looking at the time stamp for this post?

Not like I even need to preface this, but I'm not a morning person. Despite my, shall we say, elongated collegiate career, I have been working full-time for a while now; and, well, I just don't think I'm going to ever get used to getting up in the morning. And this is, of course, due to the fact that I will never get used to going to bed early.

Why the hell do I feel an incredible urge to stay up and do things, even productive things, to the point where I often have moment-of-clarity inspirations like "Jesus tap-dancing Christ, I totally forgot about that whole self-indulgent, hoping for validation from others (and secretly hoping that a really smart girl reads this and likes me :D) thing that I was doing with the blog!" when I know that I REALLY should be in bed, and that every moment I stay up is just more pain for me tomorrow???

It's really messed up, it's like some kind of demonic calculus equation where, as T (time) approaches L (Really Fucking Late); N ( my need to do shit tomorrow) is equal to the reciprocal of Z (how tired I am).

The fact that I just spent a few brain cells spelling that crap out should illustrate my current state of mind pretty accurately.

I call my blog the last place on earth, and that's sort of a wacked way of saying that I think my view of the world is unique, but I don't really want it to be unique. I want other people to see how I see things and say, "yeah, that's how I see it too."

I don't want to conform to what other people say, and I don't want others to conform to me; I just want to throw my view against the proverbial wall of people out there and see if it sticks to anybody.

So, anybody out there feel me on the "I know this is so stupid, but I think I'm going to start watching last season of The Shield. Yes, I realize this is a totally idiotic and self-destructive thing to do to myself, and I realize that I totally have a choice in this matter, but I'm a moron, and I choose to entertain myself now and eat a fat one later!"

P.S. The "Why'd I do that?!" phenomenon is a discussion for a later (hopefully not in 6 months time) post; where I'll include one of my favorite observations regarding the actions of a techonologically-dependent person such as myself when said person is in his or her place of residence when there's no power for an extended period of time. Much comic hilarity ensues.

Performance Anxiety and Star Wars Quotations.

2005-04-17T00:55:00.000-04:00

NO, not THAT kind of Performance Anxiety. (As Eddie Murphy replied in the bad-but-I-still-loved-it movie, "The Golden Child," upon smelling a strange dried piece of food in a Chinese grocery and hearing the owner say, "Yak loin, helps to keep the Yang up,"
"Nothin' wrong with my Yang...")

Well, given that I actually got a comment that assured me that someone out there actually IS reading this thing, (thanks cindy!) I better get my act together and start posting more often, huh.

So I'll try to ignore the newly-formed feeling of pressure that I have an "audience" to entertain, and just "post casual."

(That's a reference to the exchange in Return of the Jedi between Han Solo and Chewbacca when the Endor Strike Team is flying the stolen Imperial Shuttle right by the Imperial Fleet and is using the codes stolen by the Bothans: Han: "Keep your distance Chewie, but don't LOOK like you're keeping your distance." Chewie: "Rrrarrrgghh!" Han: "I don't know... fly casual!" Yes, I'm a complete geek. We now return to our regularly scheduled blog post.)

Speaking of audiences, I have a tough decision to make soon. Ever since I graduated high school, during my long strange trip of collegiate education, spanning 2 schools and too many years to even say "X-year-plan" with a straight face; I've had a summer tradition.

A group of my peers started a theater company for folks like us, high school and college aged kids looking to have fun and do some theater. We specialize in Improvisational Comedy (If you've ever seen "Who's Line is it Anyway?" you're pretty much dead on.) and also Sketch Comedy and some original short plays.

I'm pretty much the only "original" member still around, and I'm more of the older guy in charge, rather than one of the players. We've had a great run, but since I've taken the reins, no one has stepped up and wanted to take up the banner when I leave. So, so far, I haven't left.

But, as alluded to in my previous posts, I'm going through a "If I don't grow up soon, I'll need to be institutionalized" period, so I finally graduated from college, and I'm working full time. Needless to say, I'm really not going to have the time to run a summer theater company.

So I have to decide whether I want to try and tough it out, and have one last hurrah, and in the process try and impress upon a young padawan (there's that damn Star Wars crap again) the desire to take over the company; or just let it die.

I really don't WANT to let it die though, because what we have is something really special, especially where I come from. I've grown up in a pretty affluent area, and the "old money" people that run the town aren't really "into" self-sufficient outlets of entertainment for youth; meaning, they'd rather pay for a lot of the expenses and have control over what goes on.

Our company has no sponsors; we ask for donations, but we don't want a "partner." This has allowed us to do whatever we'd like to, creatively speaking. Given our audience, we've ended up trying to make our offerings somewhat family friendly; but we've had some talented writers go through our ranks, and we've done more adult shows.

To see a REAL outlet like that just shrivel up and die, is really sad; and I hope it doesn't come to that. Sure, the high school kids can do theater with the high school over the summer, but they sure as hell can't be part of a Video Sketch Show, where all the Sketches are original and we do all the filming, editing and effects.

I dunno, there's just something really great about it; about having NO "help" and still putting on a great show. For a lot of these kids that come from rich families, for them to do something on their own, without having to fall back on mommy and daddy when the going gets tough, well, that's a real life lesson.

Sigh.

Well I guess that was a "casual post;" I just hope the Emperor didn't set a trap for me by having the Imperial Fleet wait on the other side of the moon and stationing a legion of his best troops on Endor.

No Really, it's coming

2005-03-24T00:27:00.000-05:00

Alright, I guess I owe everyone a bit of an overview on myself.

I could try and make myself appear to be a guy that has it all together and having a blog is just a hip thing that I do so everyone else can see how cool I am, but that isn't me.

Fact is, while I'm very well liked by everyone who gets to know me, there's one person that just isn't satisfied with what I've done with my life thus far. And that person is me.

There's a lot I don't like about me, but to sum it all up without giving you my life's history, THE thing that is keeping me down on myself is the snail's pace at which I change and take steps to improve and achieve the things that I want.

Maybe a blog isn't for me, because I'm unlikely to update it on a regular basis, and the blogs and sites that I frequent, well, I do just that, I frequent them, meaning I check them often, sometimes even daily for stretches.

I have no problems commenting on forums and blogs on a daily basis, and those comments will be insightful and well thought out, but as for updating my own blog daily, well, I'm not there yet.

Well, well, well...

2005-02-25T21:22:00.000-05:00

You made it.

I don't know how the hell you found this place, but I'm sure glad you did.

Blogs are created via strange synergy of vanity and a desire to share. I think I've got a lot to give, and so I intend to share it, but at the same time, I'm looking for validation of my choices. I'm looking for those who would absorb what's spewing out of me, and for them to share some of their insights on this strange thing we call life.

I guess I'm looking for a the human equivalent of a friendly paper towel.

: )

If you couldn't tell, this blog is in it's fetal stages. It is FAR from being what it will be, that is, a place where I'll share my thoughts and life happenings from time to time. I'm going to put my computer graphics skills to work and turn this into a place that more closely reflects me.

Someday... when I get around to it.

- Frange