Pages

Quantum Of Solace: A Review

No, not the movie, you silly goose. That won't be released until mid-November. This is a review of the Ian Fleming short story, published way back in 1960.

The story is far from a typical Bond adventure filled with guns, girls, and megalomaniacal villains bent on world domination, and there isn't a single character with a ludicrous name like Auric Goldfinger, Pussy Galore, or I. P. Freely.

As the story begins, 007 has just finished a routine operation which is described matter-of-factly in one paragraph on the second page. Bond is in Nassau, dutifully chatting with the Governor after a tedious dinner party, when he makes a flippant remark about marrying an air hostess, i.e. a stewardess. That prompts the Governor to tell the story of an old friend who did indeed marry an air hostess, with tragic results.

Between puffs on his cigar, the Governor delivers a surprisingly poignant tale which shows how even the gentlest of people can become cruel and vindictive when pushed too far. But how far is too far? That's where the title comes into play.

Here's how the Governor describes it to Bond:

You're not married, but I think it's the same with all relationships between a man and a woman. They can survive anything so long as some kind of basic humanity exists between the two people. When all kindness has gone, when one person obviously and sincerely doesn't care if the other is alive or dead, then it's just no good.


Well, duh.

The Governor goes on to call this the Law of the Quantum Of Solace, meaning that as long as you offer the other person a glimmer of hope, or a quantum of solace, then there's a chance the marriage will survive.

Fleming seems overly proud of himself for giving a simple concept such a grandiose title, and he even has Bond say that it's "a splendid name for it" before giving his own thoughts on the theory.

I still stand by the claim that Quantum Of Solace is a terrible name for a James Bond movie, and I don't think it was a very good title for a short story either. It reeks of a pulp fiction writer getting all pretentious and trying to prove that he could have been taken seriously as an author if that was what he'd wanted.

The thing is, when Fleming isn't patting himself on the back for that title, he actually manages to tell a very compelling human drama with a nice little twist at the end. Hopefully the movie pulls off the same trick and manages to be a good film with a bad title, but if any character in the movie uses the title in a line of dialogue, I'll most likely puke up my popcorn.



Another intriguing aspect of the story is that Fleming seems to be re-examining his own career path in this passage after Bond has heard the Governor's entire story:

Bond laughed. Suddenly the violent dramatics of his own life seemed very hollow. The affair of the Castro rebels and the burned out yachts was the stuff of an adventure strip in a cheap newspaper.


And later still:

He reflected on the conference he would be having in the morning with the Coastguards and the FBI in Miami. The prospect, which had previously interested, even excited him, was now edged with boredom and futility.


Fleming seems to be wondering if he's wasted his life writing adventure tales without much emotional resonance or insight into the human condition.

I think there's always a time and a place for escapism, and I grew up on James Bond movies and novels, and even obsessed over the role-playing game for a while, but as I got older I became more interested in realistic human dramas, and it seems as though Fleming was feeling the same way.

Not counting Thunderball, which was developed from a screenplay that Fleming had been collaborating on for years, the next Bond novel published after Quantum Of Solace was The Spy Who Loved Me, which was also radically different from typical Bond fare. It was considered a failure, both critically and financially, and I remember hating it when I read it years ago, but it's interesting to see how Fleming was stretching himself, perhaps reflecting the same soul-searching expressed in that short story whose name I can't bear to type yet again.

Fleming then wrote several more successful Bond novels that stuck to the formula, but he hadn't completely given up on the idea of pushing himself because he also wrote the children's book, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, which was published in 1964, the same year he died.

Who knows what other directions his work might have gone in if he had lived, but hopefully the writing of a successful children's book that had nothing to do with Bond gave a dying man a quantum of... nope, I'm so not going there.



Or buy from Amazon.ca (Canada)

Duckman On DVD!

First, the good news: Duckman is finally available on DVD! Yay!

Now the bad news: Seasons 3 and 4 are still not available (Boo!) and if sales of the first set are not impressive enough, it's conceivable that the rest of the show will never be released, and that would be a crying shame. I should know. It's already happened to one of the favourite shows from my youth.

If you've never seen Duckman, Wikipedia offers a good rundown of the show's premise, characters, cast and history.

The style of the show falls somewhere in between South Park and The Simpsons, with Duckman himself being a combination of Eric Cartman, Daffy Duck, and Archie Bunker. And when you throw in Jason Alexander's distinctive voice and Duckman's sudden bursts of hysterics, George Costanza's fans should find a lot to love as well.




I originally saw the show in reruns several years after South Park had debuted, and considering how the characters of Fluffy and Uranus meet a fate similar to Kenny's in nearly every episode, I'd always assumed that elements of Duckman's edgy humour were inspired by Matt Stone and Trey Parker, but looking at the timelines for the two shows it might have been the other way around.

Seasons 3 and 4 were when Duckman consistently reached levels of maniacal genius that were rarely seen on television, but the first two seasons are very good as well, and worth having if only to guarantee the release of subsequent seasons. Don't let what happened to those other private detectives happen to Duckman.

To give you a taste of what to expect, I've put together a playlist featuring one of the better episodes from the first two seasons, as well as some bonus clips thrown in at the end.

Buy Seth MacFarlane Dinner At Burger King

The Onion's AV Club reports on a new contest that will allow one lucky winner to buy Seth MacFarlane dinner at Burger King.

If you don't know who Seth MacFarlane is, consider yourself lucky.

If you do know who he is, that means you're either a fan or you'd leap at the opportunity to poison his food, so you owe it to yourself to enter in either case.

Of course, if Burger King is a part of Seth MacFarlane's regular diet his stomach is presumably made of cast iron and impervious to all known poisons, but that wouldn't stop you from stabbing him in the eye with a spork.

Who Watches The Watchmen Trailer? You, That's Who!

I've been in a comic book frame of mind lately, what with all the superhero movies hitting theatres this summer.

Hot on the heels of The Dark Knight's debut comes the trailer for next year's most highly anticipated comic book - I'm sorry, graphic novel adaptation, The Watchmen.

You can watch the trailer here.

My first impression is that Dr. Manhattan looks great, but the Nite Owl looks far too young, muscular, and slick. The paunchy, bookish Dan Dreiberg from the original seems to have been sexed up for the Hollywood version, and that doesn't bode well for the movie.

Not that I ever had any real hope for this project. Not after 300, which had all the subtlety and intelligence of professional wrestling. There's no doubt that Zack Snyder has a visual flair, although he tends to overdo it if you ask me, but it's his story sense and ability to work with actors that I found so appalling in 300.

A great movie could be made based on The Watchmen, but I doubt Zack Snyder's the guy to make it.

An Eventful 24 Hours

Yesterday at this time I was unemployed, discouraged, and wondering if I would ever find work again. Then, just before bed, I decided to check the job bank, fully expecting to find nothing.

Five minutes later, I'd found a position I was perfectly qualified for. Thirty minutes later, I'd sent off an application, my hope restored.

This morning, at 11:00 am, I received a message saying I would probably be able to start today if I was available. At 1:00 PM, I spoke to the person doing the hiring over the phone. By 1:20 PM I was hired. At 3:00 PM, I met my new boss face to face for the first time. By 5:00 pm I had been given the keys to the office and was left alone to supervise the operation. What's more, I was working in the owner's office where she'd left her passport in plain view.

It's a good thing I'm so damn trustworthy.

I don't normally like it when things move this fast, but it seems my new employer was every bit as desperate as I was, so it's a good fit for now. There's no job security, it's strictly an on call position that could disappear next week or next month, and the responsibilities are significantly less than what I'm used to, but the hourly rate is as much as I've ever made in my life, the location is good, and I can show up for work in shorts if I want to.

It's a dream job in many ways, but my main duty is something I haven't had to do regularly for ten years, and I hated it then. But there's a good possibility for advancement, and if things continue to move quickly I'll hopefully be moving on to bigger and better things soon.

I wonder what tomorrow will bring?

New Actors, Old Roles

When The Dark Knight opens this Friday, the character of Rachel Dawes will appear, but Katie Holmes will not. And in the trailers for the latest Mummy movie, that's clearly not Rachel Weisz tagging alongside Brendan Fraser. The re-casting of raven-haired Rachels is a distraction in both cases, but hardly without precedent. And with the first of these high profile sequels opening this week, the Onion's AV Club and IFC.com both decided to look at other awkward re-castings in film history.

I think the AV Club did a better job of it by focusing on situations where characters with new faces are appearing in the same timeline as their earlier incarnations, so reboots and remakes are given a free pass, but the IFC deserves top marks for remembering Crispin Glover's absence from the Back To The Future sequels.

In the case of The Dark Knight, I'm more than willing to suspend my disbelief because Katie Holmes was horribly miscast in the first film and Maggie Gyllenhaal seems much more at home in Christopher Nolan's version of Gotham City. Holmes is adorable eye candy and she's been excellent in other roles, but she's far too youthful and perky to be convincing as a District Attorney who bravely crusades against murderous crime bosses. Maggie Gyllenhaal, with her off-beat looks and aura of intelligence, should easily fill Katie Holmes' shoes, but not her bra, while making the role her own.

And if the re-casting of Katie Holmes is distracting, imagine how awkward it will be if the studio tries to replace Heath Ledger as the Joker in the next Batman film. I doubt Christopher Nolan would get involved with something like that, but it's just the sort of thing a clueless executive might think up.

Here's hoping that common sense prevails.



Or buy from Amazon.ca (Canada)


I have very little to say about Maria Bello taking over for Rachel Weisz in the Mummy sequel because I like both actresses but I despised the first film, skipped the second, and have no intention of watching the third. Replacing the writer/director with someone a lot better than Rob Cohen would be the only way to get me to watch another Mummy movie.

You can read the AV Club's article on awkward re-castings here and the IFC take on these matters here. Both are interesting reads for movie buffs.

I can't think of any glaring omissions on either list, but I did find David Hyde Pierce's absence in Hellboy 2 a disappointment. I know it wasn't him under Abe Sapien's makeup in the original, but his distinctive voice brought the character to life in the first film, and Doug Jones gave a comparatively flat performance in the second.

And on a final note, I got a real kick out of this part of the IFC's article:

For unspecified reasons — speculation ranges from script dissatisfaction to loyalty to departing "Silence of the Lambs" director Jonathan Demme — Jodie Foster chose not to reprise her performance as FBI Agent Clarice Starling. Ultimately, the honor of playing Clarice in Ridley Scott's sequel fell to Julianne Moore. Demme went to great lengths to diminish Foster's Starling physically onscreen; in a world of beefy guys, she's always the smallest person in the elevator. Scott and Moore's Starling, on the other hand, is some kind of supercop; blissfully snoozing seconds before she's blowing baddies away. After seeing the performances side by side, it's hard to believe their IMDb pages, which state that at five foot four inches tall, Moore stands just a half an inch above Foster. In, "Hannibal," it's more like half a foot. People joke about the camera adding 10 pounds; I never heard of it adding 10 inches before.


How soon we forget Boogie Nights.

Batman, Spider-Man, X-Men & Other Comics For Sale

"But they'll be worth money some day!"

That's the excuse given by countless young boys and (occasionally) girls when their parents ask why they're wasting all their money on comic books.

Well, according to the comic book price guide, some of the issues I have are in fact worth money now. Selling them, however, has proven to be a pain.

I've got ads up right now on Craigslist and other places, so I figured I may as well post the details here too. One never knows who might be reading.

They're all from the mid 80s-early 90s, and most are in Very Fine-Near Mint condition according to my unprofessional analysis.



Amazing Spider-Man #264, 284, 286-298*, 301-311, 314, 319-326, 328, 329, 331-360, 365

(*first Todd MacFarlane) $600 for the lot

Batman: The Killing Joke

(1st edition, one of the great Joker stories ever told) $10

Complete or nearly complete runs of the following:

Batman: Legends Of The Dark Knight #16-39
Batman #431-479
Detective Comics #592-661
Uncanny X-Men #225-261, 270-285
X-Men #1-5 (1991)
John Constantine: Hellblazer #1-69
X-Force #1-8
Green Arrow #1-74
Daredevil #252-302
X-Factor #1-90
Spectacular Spider-Man #134-183
Web Of Spider-Man #30-90

Assorted issues of:
New Mutants (first Deadpool)
Excalibur #1-25
Batman: Shadow Of The Bat
The Punisher, Punisher War Journal

And a handful of indie comics, Dark Horse, Aliens vs. Predator, Star Wars, Terminator, Concrete, etc.






Make an offer on any issues that interest you, or for the whole lot. Any questions can be emailed to johnerle (at) yahoo.com.

Sarah Silverman Dumps Jimmy Kimmel

E! Online reports that Sarah Silverman has finally come to her senses and ended her relationship with Jimmy Kimmel after five long, baffling years.

The article doesn't specifically state that it was Silverman who did the dumping, but the reverse would be inconceivable, so I'd say it's a safe bet that Kimmel was the one being cast aside.

I happened to be watching Silverman's guest appearance on Star Trek: Voyagerjust last night, so I can only assume that she sensed I was thinking about her and had a vision of the better life that awaits her if she'd only pick up the phone and rescind that restraining order.

Here's my offer to you, Sarah Silverman. I will happily bathe you from head to toe and perform a cleansing ritual to remove the lingering stench of failure which must still be clinging to your sublime skin and luxurious hair after spending so much time in close proximity to Jimmy Kimmel.

In other words, I'll help you wash that man right out of your hair, massage that man right out of your shoulders, rub that man right out of your thighs, and tickle that man right out of your taint.

Furthermore, I promise to dedicate every waking moment to supporting you and fulfilling your every need in a way that only an unemployed man could. There's no chance of me ever placing my career before you since I have no career and no desire to find one. And I could never be jealous of your accomplishments because the more successful you are the more time I get to spend basking in your glory, helping you traverse mud puddles, carrying your purse, eating bonbons, and hand-washing your unmentionables.

I also pledge to be less fat and every bit as charming and witty as Jimmy Kimmel ever was, but really, how could I not?

You can read more about my on-again/off-again/in-again/out-again relationship with Sarah Silverman by clicking here.

In Bruges: A Review

In Bruges (it rhymes with stooge) is a wonderfully coarse and talkative crime caper that deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as the best of Tarantino and the Coen Brothers.

Two hitmen (Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson) have been ordered to hide out in Bruges (it's in Belgium) until the heat dies down after a recent job. Gleeson, best known as "Mad Eye" moody from Harry Potter films, is a reasonably cultured and introspective hitman, so he delights in the city's medieval buildings, canals, and cobblestone streets, but despite the director's obvious love of this stunning city, Farrell's character never wavers from his belief that Bruges is a shithole. While Gleeson is awestruck by the city's rich history, Farrell "sulks like a five-year old who's dropped his sweeties".

He only perks up when he discovers a film shoot involving midgets, and then meets a beautiful young woman (Chloe) who he invites to dinner after sneaking on set. They each have sordid pasts, but offer each other a shot at redemption.

Farrell is a bundle of nervous energy, as usual, but this time there's a reason why his character is always trying to crawl out of his own skin. I won't reveal the reason here, but after a half hour or so you'll understand why he's constantly at war with himself. On a dinner date, for example, he tells Chloe a coarse joke about a recent series of murders in Belgium. When Chloe says that one of the victims was a friend of hers, his self-loathing is genuine, but moments later she reveals that she was only teasing, and Farrell is soon bursting with laughter. A minute later, he's beating up the man at the next table.

Gleeson, on the other hand, is the relatively philosophical voice of reason. He's a more experienced hitman who's good at his job, but would have chosen a different career if his life hadn't turned out the way it did. He manages to think of himself as a relatively decent person despite the fact that he kills people for money, so he becomes Farrell's de facto therapist, tour guide, and father figure while trying to help him work through his issues, which are very real and not played for laughs like in Grosse Pointe Blank or Analyze This.

But the sightseeing, bonding, and laying low can't last forever, so once the high-maintenance, volatile crime boss (Ralph Fiennes) reveals the real reason that Farrell and Gleeson are in Bruges, the threat of future violence comes into play.

You might find the first half of the film a bit slow if you're expecting non-stop action, and if you're easily offended you might find yourself wincing repeatedly as Farrell makes consistently rude remarks about Americans, homosexuals, midgets, and countless others.

The fact that there happens to be a film shoot taking place In Bruges is somewhat self-indulgent, but the dialogue was so sharp and funny, and the location was so stunning, and the brotherly relationship between Gleeson and Farrell was so appealing that I was able to forgive the somewhat contrived ending.

Unlike most comedies about killers, this one reminds us that innocent people often get hurt when there's gunplay, and when the violence does come in the third act it's quite brutal, so the movie should appeal to fans of the Coen Brothers' Fargo. And there are obvious parallels between these two hitmen and those portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson and John Travolta in Pulp Fiction, but In Bruges has a style and tone that feels fresh. And, most importantly, it's extremely funny and I cared about these characters as much as they cared for each other.


Final verdict: 9/10


Horror Nights At The Rio Theatre: Every Friday Night @ Midnight In July

Night owls and horror fans rejoice!

My favourite East Vancouver movie house, the Rio Theatre is showing classic horror films every Friday night this month.

Black Dog Video and the Rio Theatre present:

Scary Midnight double features of Classic Cult films every friday night in the month of July...don't be scared!!! tickets $10, costumes, fake blood, prizes!!!!

This week: Friday July 4th, Dawn
of The Dead & Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things
July 11th Dead Alive & Return of the Living Dead
July 18th Fudoh the New Generation & Ichi the Killer
July 25th The Rocky Horror Picture Show with Live Performances!


Bad Lieutenant: The Remake

That's one movie I never thought would get remade.

Here's a plot summary of the original, courtesy of the IMDB:

A police Lieutenant goes about his daily tasks of investigating homicides, but is more interested in pursuing his vices. He has accumulated a massive debt betting on baseball, and he keeps doubling to try to recover. His bookies are beginning to get agitated. The Lieutenant does copious amounts of drugs, cavorts with prostitutes, and uses his status to take advantage of teenage girls. While investigating a nun's rape, he begins to reflect on his lifestyle.


Here's the basic plot as I remember it: Harvey Keitel plays a cop who witnesses many bad people doing bad things, but he himself is also a bad person who does bad things. As he investigates a very bad crime and the badness of his bad behaviour escalates, he becomes an even badder person, until the final twist at the end when he does something that is either very, very bad or kinda good, depending on how you look at it. Then he dies.

He's badder than The Bad Seed, badder than Bad Santa (or Badder Santa) and badder than both the Bad Boys put together. He does more bad things than the cast of Very Bad Things, he's a badder influence than the entire cast of Bad Influence, and he dispenses with the Good while going straight for the Bad and the Ugly.

He's just that bad.

Imagine The Bad News Bears being molested by the Big Bad Wolf on the set on Michael Jackson's Bad, and you get some sense of just how bad the Bad Lieutenant is.

Depressing and repetitive is how I remember the film. It makes Todd Solondz' "Happiness" look like a Hope and Crosby road movie. Not exactly the sort of thing that usually gets made in Hollywood, let alone gets made twice.

German director Werner Herzog will be behind the camera, and even more surprising is the A-list cast the remake is attracting: Nicolas Cage, Val Kilmer, and Eva Mendes have already signed on.

Now word yet on whether there'll be a cameo appearance by Harvey Keitel's penis.

Hancock - Review

Based on the negative buzz and the underwhelming trailer and the mixed reviews and the track record of director Peter Berg, I went into Hancock with low expectations but came out pleasantly surprised.

I found it very refreshing to see two major plot twists in a big budget Hollywood movie that weren't even hinted at in the trailers. Previews usually give away the entire movie in two and a half minutes, but not this time around, and for that reason alone I hope Hancock is a big hit. Maybe it'll give Hollywood the courage to show similar restraint with other marketing campaigns in the future.

Some audiences may be disappointed with the directions Hancock takes because it doesn't follow the typical superhero formula. There isn't much of a villain and the final showdown is a bit anti-climactic. There isn't as much action as you'd except from a Will Smith summer blockbuster, and when it does come, it's darker and more violent than I expected. And even though I laughed a lot, the humour is often edgier than anything in Men In Black or any other recent Will Smith vehicle.

The movie is also more serious and emotionally resonant than I expected, and that may be the final straw for the normal popcorn munchers. Hancock isn't just a comical boozehound/superhero, he's a super-entity with deep emotional scars who takes solace in the bottle whenever possible. And he isn't a loudmouth asshole simply because that's what passes for cool in today's youth culture. He's a jerk because he hates his life, and there's no end in sight because he's immortal, so he lashes out at everyone around him.

I still think Peter Berg is a terrible director, what with his obsessive use of shaky cams, extreme close ups, and sudden zooms for no apparent reason. But the script was solid and unusual, Will Smith does more than just act cool for a change, and Jason Bateman hits all the right notes as Hancock's PR guru, so while Berg and his cinematographer were busy showing off, everyone else got down to making a good movie.

Hancock could have been better with a different director, or it could have been a lot worse with Michael Bay behind the camera, but the film is still worth seeing for the performances and surprises, which I've tried not to give away.

Surprises in a summer blockbuster? What are the odds?

Final Verdict: 7/10

Baseball - A Game Of Inches

One the great things about baseball is that you could watch a million games and you might never see this happen again. And the greatest thing about YouTube is that even casual fans like me never have to miss the truly remarkable plays like this.*



Missed it byyyyy that much.


* Of course, if Viacom has it's way, YouTube may be about to change forever.

Deep Thoughts/Shallow Jokes - July 4th Edition

If today is Independence Day, when do Americans commemorate Dependence On Foreign Oil Day?


Wall-E: A Review

There's something inherently wrong about using words to describe the brilliance of WALL-E, because this is a film that places the emphasis squarely on visuals and music to tell one of the most magical stories of the past few years.

Alfred Hitchcock once said that you're ready to start shooting once the script has been written and the dialogue has been added. The people behind WALL-E understand better than most that talk is cheap and that characters are truly defined by their actions, not their words.

WALL-E is a thoroughly adorable creation not because he offers snappy banter and pop culture references while mugging for the camera like the dogs in that hideous trailer for Beverly Hills Chihuahua, but because everything he does speaks volumes about what a good-natured creature he is. In the same way that R2D2 was the emotional core of Star Wars, this little robot is the most human, genuinely heart-warming movie creation in years. Not since Puss In Boots flashed his baby blues in Shrek 2 has an animated character expressed so much while saying nothing.

And the deserted planet that WALL-E inhabits is an equally fascinating treat for the eyes. When seen from space, the familiar blue, white, and green sphere once known as Earth has turned a rusty shade of brown. WALL-E has been left alone on this abandoned planet to clean up the mess that humans have left behind, and his piles of garbage tower over the largest skyscrapers. The shots of this lone robot wandering through a desolate wasteland while humming a catchy tune are truly stunning.

WALL-E happily goes about his business, as he's done for 700 years, because it's the only life he's ever known. He works all day, compacting garbage into neat little cubes, occasionally keeping trinkets that he finds interesting like egg beaters, a rubik's cube, and the box that a diamond ring came in. The diamond ring, having no inherent value that WALL-E can understand, gets tossed on the trash heap.

WALL-E's managed to survive long after all the other WALL-E models have broken down, and like many Sci-Fi robots before him, the more information he assimilates, the more his own personality develops. He's a machine that's evolved to the verge of sentience, but we see him as a young child who's just beginning to make sense of the world around him and his place in it.

His only friend is a pet cockroach who follows him everywhere he goes like a loyal puppy, and WALL-E spends his off-hours watching Hello Dolly and emulating the dance moves. There's also something about the love story that he finds fascinating, but he doesn't quite understand it all. And then EVE arrives.

She's a newer model robot, apparently designed by one of Steve Jobs' ancestors, and she's been sent to Earth on some unknown mission. WALL-E is initially terrified of this strange visitor, but the more he watches her the more fascinated he becomes, and his initial timid attempts at courtship are thoroughly endearing to the audience, if not to EVE. No matter how many times she threatens to blow him to bits with her highly advanced weapons, all he wants to do is get a little closer, earn her trust, protect her from harm, and hold hands.

Beyond the love story and the laughs, there's some very effective social commentary on the dangers of mega-corporations and our increasingly obese, lazy society. This is deftly handled in a way that's hard to miss, but never heavy-handed.

I honestly don't know if most children will enjoy Wall-E because it lacks the hyper-kinetic action of typical kiddie fare, but I sincerely hope they'll respond favourably to WALL-E's expressive eyes, charming body language, and sweet-tempered personality.

If, after seeing WALL-E, your kids would rather watch Beverly Hills Chihuahua, I weep for the future.

And as for adults, if you don't find WALL-E to be a wondrous movie-going experience, there's an excellent chance that you're a cold-hearted bastard, and if I was the last robot on earth and my choice of companion came down to you or a cockroach, I'd choose the cockroach.

Deep Thoughts/Shallow Jokes

I love being in touch with my feminine side, because it's the only way I get to touch anything that's feminine.

:rimshot:

Planets Align On July 4th

Visit this page on NASA's website to learn more about how to view this phenomenon.



I just hope the Bush administration doesn't see this as a sign.

"That there looks like a coalition of willing planets to me. Time to invade Iran!"

Worst Movie Trailer Ever?

I normally try to avoid hyperbole. I hate browsing YouTube and seeing every other video labeled the Worst ___ Ever! or the BEST ____ EVER!!!!!

But after seeing this movie trailer twice and cringing both times, I've scoured my brain to think of a more annoying trailer, and I've come up blank.

View the trailer here, if you dare

It's drivel like this that gives animated movies a bad name. Today was the second time I've seen this trailer, and viewing it before the remarkable Wall-E* was quite a stunning contrast.

If I had kids, I'd sooner give them up for adoption than take them to see this crap. And if they insisted on owning the DVD, I'd be forced to sell them into the white slave trade.

* more on Wall-E later. What a brilliant, heart-warming film.

Q: The Best Thing About Summer?

A: Girls in their summer clothes.

Q: The worst thing about summer?
A: Me in my summer clothes.

(My sincere apologies if this post made you think of that horrible, horrible Bruce Springsteen song, unless, of course, you like that song, in which case, you're welcome.)

A Canada Day Playlist

I put together this Canada Day Playlist on my other site, Dynamic Range Radio, and I thought I'd share it here too.



If you want to read my thoughts on each of the videos, just click the following link:

Canada Day Playlist on Dynamic Range Radio

The Seventh Python - Neil Innes

A documentary about Neil Innes called The Seventh Python is having it's world premiere in Hollywood this Thursday, and you can read all about it here.

Or watch the trailer here:

(Well, not here, exactly, but several pixels below here. And by here I mean there. Up there. And to the left. Unless the text has wrapped onto the next line in your browser, in which case a simple "up there" might be more accurate when referring to the location of here. As for the trailer, it's down there.



If Neil Innes is The Seventh Python, I guess that makes Carol Cleveland the Linda McCartney that none of them slept with.

Lewis And Lewis: Come On Down To The Farm

Newsflash: Rednecks Hate Gays!

I suppose that revelation isn't exactly newsworthy, but the fact that senile hillbillies have figured out how to use YouTube is a bit surprising.

If you like your ignorant homophobia with a catchy country beat, then you'll thouroughly enjoy the following video.



I love the simplistic logic that says gay marriage = no reproduction = end of human race. If 10% of the population chooses not to reproduce, the worst that will happen is the massive burden of over-population may be eased somewhat, and maybe some of those nice gay couples can adopt some of the abandoned children produced by careless breeders.

I doubt this old-timer has ever met a gay person, and I'm not convinced he's spent much time on a farm either.

Most animals will screw anything that moves, regardless of gender or species. Growing up, I had a female dog who would hump my leg, which, according to Farmer John here, is not normal. Perhaps he'd be happier if my leg had been humping her.

And if we're using animals as the benchmark for what's normal, doesn't that make religion abnormal? Ray Lewis argues that he's never seen two roosters walking arm in arm, but I've never seen a rooster praying either.

And if you're in the mood to read Mr. Normal's lengthy, rambling manifesto, just head on over to the Lewis And Lewis website, y'all, and read up on Ray's Rantings, and listen to Missing In Action, both of which can easily be interpreted as a call to arms in a Holy War. But who Christians should be fighting is a bit unclear because, in addition to gays, Ray rants against illegal immigrants, China, the liberal media, Iran, apathetic Christians, Leprechauns, and just about everyone except him and the missus. Here's just a sample:

This is our country. It was built on a Godly foundation .The freedoms we’ve enjoyed have come at a tremendous price. From our founding fathers who pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, to our sons and daughters in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other parts of the world. Blood has been the currency that has bought our liberty. It would be criminal, for those of us who still believe in the foundational principals of this great nation not to stand against those who would destroy our morality, our laws and our sacred heritage.

There's also lots of comments on "Come On Down To The Farm", many positive, and some negative, and in defense of the Lewises, they haven't removed those comments. Or perhaps they just haven't figured out the delete function yet.

And in related news, why does my Vancouver neighbourhood smell like manure today? There's a stiff wind blowing, but I doubt it carried that powerful stink all the way from Abbotsford.

I moved to the big city to escape that horrible stench, and to get away from people like Lewis And Lewis, so today was a series of unwelcome flashbacks for me.

Reverse Graffiti

Inhabitat.com offers this story on an interesting concept called reverse graffiti, where an artist scrapes through the grime on a wall in order to create art. And the results are intriguing.



Just imagine what this guy could do with the tiles in my bathroom.

Stan Winston RIP

The LA Times reports that legendary makeup and special effects man Stan Winston has died at 62. He was one of the best to be sure, having worked on Predator, Aliens, Edward Scissorhands, and countless others. He also worked on John Carpenter's The Thing, which was featured in the Wired article on coolest movie metamorphoses I wrote about just yesterday.

I'd hate to be the mortician who has to apply Stan Winston's makeup before the memorial. I'd be worried that his ghost would be hanging over my shoulder making note of everything I'm doing wrong.

Memorable Movie Metamorphoses

Wired recently posted a list of their coolest movie metamorphoses, which is a pretty solid list, especially David Cronenberg's The Fly and American Werewolf In London. However, Smeagol's transformation into Gollum in the beginning of The Return Of The King should have made the list, and I thought there was one other glaring omission from a movie that many of you may have forgotten.

Fright Night was an entertaining horror comedy aimed squarely at teens, and the movie holds up fairly well, even now that I'm *ahem!* just a wee bit older. Roddy McDowall is priceless at Peter Vincent, an actor who's made a career playing fearless vampire killers in B-movies, but when he's forced to slay an actual vampire in real life he gets much more than he bargained for.

He's attacked by a character nicknamed Evil Ed, a horror movie geek who's the pathetic yet sympathetic best friend of the main character, Charlie Brewster. Evil Ed has been an outcast his entire life, so he becomes seduced by the power that being a vampire brings him.

He takes the form of a wolf, gets a stake through the heart courtesy of Peter Vincent, and the resulting transformation is one of the most memorable sequences in horror movie history.




Up until this point, Fright Night had been a fairly light-hearted, entertaining, and spooky flick, so I wasn't expecting such a poignant death scene, especially after the character had ostensibly become a villain. Top marks to the makeup and sound effects teams, the composer, both the actors involved, and the director for injecting so much unexpected pathos into a genre flick targeted at teenagers. Even watching this scene out of context via YouTube, it gave me chills.


The Incredible Hulk on IMDB

I'm a big fan of the Internet Movie Database. I visit it several times a day to look up information on whatever movie I'm watching, thinking about, or reading about. I love participating in the polls and rating movies, and I have a morbid fascination with the message boards. Reading them makes me weep for the future of Hollywood (and humanity) but I can't seem to keep away.

But my enjoyment of the IMDB has been severely hampered for the last week or so by the in-your-face marketing for the Incredible Hulk on the site's main page.

The cartoonish CGI image of the Hulk replacing the normal banner is mildly distracting, but forgivable. The real problem has been the trailer which automatically begins to download every single time I visit the front page.

That's a ton of wasted bandwidth, so I find myself clicking on the first link I can find just to avoid downloading more of the trailer than is necessary. But if I want to actually read any of the material on the front page, I'm forced to endure that same bloody trailer over and over and over and over again.

Does that kind of endlessly repetitive marketing actually work on some people? It certainly doesn't work on me. Prior to this misguided marketing blitz, there was a small chance that I might see The Incredible Hulk in the theatre on a whim, but I'm so sick of that miserable trailer that I'm deliberately avoiding the movie in theatres, and I probably won't ever rent the DVD either.

Rushing out a reboot of the Hulk franchise a mere four years after Ang Lee's version reeks of desperation anyway, but the incessant marketing was the final straw.

Creating audience awareness is the first role of marketing, but enough is enough. My awareness has turned into annoyance.




Canadian DMCA: Bill C-61

The Republican Conservative Government of America Canada recently unveiled Bill C-61, which limits my rights to use the media I've purchased in the way I see fit.


Back in the stone age, I used a primitive audio-visual device known as a VCR to record television shows and movies that had been broadcast into my home via cable. Little did I know that this was just the beginning of a life of crime.

That big box of VHS tapes is now collecting dust in my closet alongside an old VCR that probably doesn't work any more, but the mere possession of those tapes makes me a criminal according to this laughable, convoluted, and unnecessary new legislation.

Also, that picture I posted of one of our American Overlords alongside our puppet prime minister is most definitely a violation of someone's copyright. Oh, the humanity!

If you're a Canadian who cares about your rights in the digital age, and if you don't want to see an entire generation of young Canadians being sued by corporate giants for posting videos on YouTube, then you should educate yourself on the implications of the Canadian Copyright Reform that's currently taking place.

Read the official government spin on the new bill here, then read an opposing viewpoint from Michael Geist by clicking here.

Write your MP before it's too late and ask him or her why the government is wasting your money on this nonsense when they should be improving health care, saving the environment, creating jobs, fixing that mess in Afghanistan...

If Valentine's Day Cards Were Honest...


This article comes from Cracked.com, the online version of the comedy magazine you probably didn't realize still existed.

When I was a kid, Cracked was to Mad Magazine what the Microsoft Zune is to the iPod. Then, it seemed to disappear, the same way HD-DVD is about to disappear, and I never thought of Cracked again until I started noticing the occasional article on Digg.

Yes, Cracked has survived into the digital age, and gotten considerably racier than I remember it, but not spectacularly funnier.

This article seems to be the exception, not the rule, but I found it good for a few laughs.

False Advertising - Guiltless Gourmet



Despite being lower in fat than their fried competitors, and damned tasty, the baked tortilla chips known as Guiltless Gourmet make a promise they can't keep.

Let me assure you that if you eat an entire 200 gram bag in one sitting, you will indeed feel guilty. Also quite sleepy and a little bit sick.

I think I'll sue once I have enough strength to lift my arms.

Sarah Silverman And Jimmy Kimmel

There's a very funny video circulating on the interwebs right now, but it's much funnier if you know a little bit of the backstory, so I'll set it up in case you're not familiar with the participants.

Sarah Silverman is one of the sexiest comediennes of all time, and host of her own successful show on Comedy Central. I've had a crush on her since her early days as a bit player on Saturday Night Live, and I still fondly recall the episode of Greg The Bunny where she got her leg humped by an overly affectionate muppet.


But enough about me and my fetishes.

Jimmy Kimmel is an American late night talk show host with no discernible personality. He's basically a chubbier, blander version of Jay Leno. How he's kept his job this long is a mystery to me, but even more baffling is the fact that Sarah Silverman and Jimmy Kimmel have been dating for five years.

I would have hated Jimmy Kimmel purely on the basis of his horrible, horrible talk show, but the fact that he's kept Sarah Silverman from playing the field for so long makes me hate him even more. Clearly she's attracted to pasty, pudgy men, which means I have a shot, so why oh why does she stay with this schmuck?

Anyway, Sarah Silverman is a frequent guest on the schmuck's show, and she recently presented this very funny clip. As proof of Jimmy Kimmel's complete incompetence, notice how he says nothing even remotely amusing before or after the clip.



And here's a note to all the people who've posted this video on YouTube and social networking sites - notice how I didn't ruin the joke by putting a spoiler in the title of the post? Let that be a lesson to you all.

(Scroll down for the rest of the post, spoilers and all.)





















Yes, she's fucking Matt Damon. That would be quite a step up from Jimmy Kimmel.

Apparently this clip is even funnier if you're a fan of Jimmy Kimmel's show - maybe you've noticed that I'm not - because Kimmel has made many jokes about Matt Damon in the past. And obviously I'm using a very broad interpretation of the word "jokes" here, since nothing Jimmy Kimmel ever says deserves to be described as such. Kimmel's Wiki page has more details on his running gags involving Matt Damon.

Actually, it occurs to me that, in a strange way, Jimmy Kimmel is the perfect talk show host because any C-list celebrity who sits beside him automatically seems witty, charming, and attractive by comparison, and the average egotistical actor would much rather feel superior by outwitting Jimmy Kimmel on national TV than risk losing a confrontation with the sometimes ornery David Letterman. This useless-lump-in-a-suit strategy helped keep Mike Bullard on Canadian TV for many years, so kudos to you Jimmy Kimmel for setting the bar even lower and keeping that seat warm for five long years in such a highly competitive field.

And since my nastiness toward Jimmy Kimmel could easily be interpreted as sour grapes, let me just say that I suspect he's a very nice guy in person and a sweet, caring boyfriend who's always giving Sarah Silverman little presents, and making her French toast in the morning, and doesn't complain when she asks him to pick up tampons on the way home, and I'll bet her grandmother probably thinks he's adorable. He gives off that kind of a vibe, so the truth is I'm not surprised he could land a woman like Sarah Silverman and manage to keep her.

Damn him and his even-tempered nature to hell.

"Hey baby, you ever been felt up?"

Untraceable: A Review

There are two independent, single-screen movie theatres in my neighbourhood that I like to support, even to the point of paying for movies I'd never go out of my way to see. Sometimes when I'm sitting across the street having a slice of pizza with the marquee staring me right in the face, I'll take a chance on a movie like Untraceable, especially when I'm feeling less than great and my only plans for the evening involve going home and doing a load of laundry.

After browsing the reviews last week, the general consensus seemed to be that Untraceable was a below-average cop thriller which bordered on torture porn, and based on those reviews I had no desire to see it. But I'd forgotten all about that tonight, until the opening sequence of a kitten in a cat carrier in a dingy basement, meowing and scratching at its cage, begging to be let out, while a video camera records the whole thing. An unseen man places what appears to be a glue trap in front of the carrier, places some food on the other side of the trap to entice the kitten, then releases it from its cage. At this point, I was thinking that paying for this movie was a mistake.

I suddenly remembered the torture porn accusations from the reviews I'd read and I started to imagine the worst. As an animal lover who lost a beloved cat of my own in the past year, I found the tension in this scene almost unbearable, until a harsh light suddenly lit up the kitten's face, causing it to hiss, and then the film cut to a different location.

I had to give the filmmaker's credit for creating an extremely nerve-wracking scene without ever resorting to grisly images of feline flesh being torn apart, so I settled in to give the movie a fair chance.

Untraceable focuses on Jennifer Marsh, an FBI cybercrimes expert played by Diane Lane, presumably because Ashely Judd was unavailable. When Marsh and her coworkers, including a bland Colin Hanks, discover the website killwithme.com, they see a still frame of the kitten on the glue trap, and if it weren't for the dialogue I wouldn't have known for sure that the kitten was dead.

The movie shows similar restraint for most of the first act, even as Marsh watches grisly videos of suicides and tragic accidents on the internet. The camera usually focuses on the characters while small, grainy images play out on computer screens in the background, and I was thinking that Untraceable was shaping up to be a reasonably tasteful thriller with a message I could really get behind, i.e. condemning the voyeuristic desire to watch real violence online. But then the killer claimed his first human victim.

I've never seen a movie that was labelled as torture porn, such as the Saw or Hostel series, and if I have my way, I never will. So when the murderer started slowly killing people on-screen in increasingly bizarre ways while streaming the deaths for an online audience, the movie lost some of the respect it had earned during the opening. Although, I must admit, I was expecting a lot worse.

Yes, there is quite a bit of blood during the first torture scene, and extensive make-up work showing flesh being destroyed in various ways during later murders, but I didn't think it was drastically worse than images from other movies which critics have praised, such as Silence Of The Lambs or Se7en. The main difference is the amount of screen time given to the death scenes which play out in real-time, but is that any different from Alfred Hitchcock's Frenzy, released way back in 1971, which had equally lengthy murder scenes, minus all the special effects.

I'm not about to rush out and rent Saw IV after surviving Untraceable relatively unscathed, and I'm not saying the movie isn't grisly, but I'm not convinced that the movie deserves the torture porn label. The bulk of the images during the murder scenes focus on the victims' faces, the shocked reactions of the investigators who watch the killings online as they take place, or the cold, bemused expression of the killer. There are closeups and inserts of images that are designed to be revolting, but the movie does hold back more than I expected, albeit less than I would have liked.

As for the rest of the movie, it's an uneven police procedural with both its fair share of nice touches and ludicrous moments. It was shot in Portland, Oregon, so there's lots of wonderful scenery, unique locations, and interesting cityscapes that you wouldn't have gotten shooting in an over-used location like L.A., New York, or even here in Vancouver.

The film does get preachy at times, and its message is weakened by hypocritically showing the kind of violence it claims to loathe. It also relies on too many Hollywood clichés, such as when the killer deliberately taunts the investigators and eventually targets the woman in charge of the case.

On the plus side, the killer unexpectedly chooses men as his first three victims, which goes against the conventions of the genre, thereby making those scenes a little less tacky, and when the connection between the victims is finally discovered, I found the revelations quite clever and intriguing. And the basic premise - the more hits the killer's website gets, the faster his victims die, thereby making web surfers complicit in the crime - had great potential.

Diane Lane's performance keeps the film grounded in reality, and Billy Burk does nice work as the local cop assigned to the case. The fact they don't immediately fall into bed together makes this a better movie than it might have been, and the personal lives of the characters are handled in a way that's emotionally honest.

But the killer's increasingly elaborate torture devices become a bit silly, which may be why I didn't find them as disturbing as something more plausible, ie. a sick bastard with a big knife. And the way the killer finally ensnares his first female captive is laughable. He's supposed to be a technological wizard, but his expertise in that sequence completely destroyed the film's already thin credibility.

This genre is one I haven't paid much attention to for years now, and since seeing David Fincher's brilliant Zodiac several times this year, I think any movie that spends this much time focused on the bloody exploits of a brilliant sadistic killer will seem tacky and exploitative by comparison. So, all in all, Untraceable is a decent, occasionally formulaic and somewhat passé serial killer movie with moments of true inspiration, improved greatly by Diane Lane's performance and the fresh look of its locations.

See this movie if you liked: Kiss The Girls, Hannibal




PS - I can't remember which site I saw this on, but I read movie reviews somewhere that required the reviewer to list their biases to help readers better understand where the reviewer is coming from and if they're likely to react the same way. I think that's a brilliant innovation in the world of movie reviews, so I'll do the same thing now and in any future movie reviews I post here.

Biases
The Reviewer Likes: Diane Lane, rain-swept vistas, kittens
The Reviewer Hates: Blood and guts, recycled plot devices, doing laundry

"NSFWPD Blue" or "Nudity vs. Prudity"

In a move that will either (a) cost ABC 1.4 million dollars, or (b) cost the FCC its last ounce of credibility, the Federal Communications Commission recently fined the network for an episode of NYPD Blue which aired way back in 2003 and featured female nudity.

The clip from that episode is currently available on YouTube, although who knows for how long, but this link is working as of right now. Let me reiterate that the clip features a beautiful naked woman in all her natural glory (gasp!) so the video is probably not safe for work, church picnics, or show and tell.



In case the YouTube clip disappears, here's a vidcap of Charlotte Ross' posterior for posterity.

(In case you haven't figured it out by now, the picture is not exactly safe for work either. Scroll down to see the image and read the rest of my thoughts on the subject.)

































I love this story for countless reasons, including the fact that it brought this clip to my attention. I think every heterosexual male who watched the show back in the day was eagerly awaiting a nude scene from Charlotte Ross, but this episode aired long after I, and most of the western world, had stopped watching the show, which is just one reason the FCC decision is so ridiculous.

It wasn't too hard to find a history of female nudity on NYPD Blue, and judging by the still frames, this Charlotte Ross clip was arguably the most explicit nude scene in the show's history, although a couple of Amy Brenneman's come close, so what makes this scene fine-worthy?

Is it the fact that there's a child involved? Is it the fact that the camera offers a long, lingering look at Charlotte Ross from the rear, plus side-boob during the walk to the shower, or is it because the shaky cam operator makes an oh-so-subtle move to go back for seconds later in the scene? Is it the between the thighs shot of the kid, or the angle from behind his head where his jug ears give the impression of areolas? Or is it the barely concealed boobies and va-ja-jay in the final shot when Charlotte Ross covers herself up to spare the kid a memory he'll savour forever permanent psychological damage? According to the FCC, it's none of these things. It's the fact that the episode aired at 9:00 pm in several time zones.

ABC had gotten away with brief glimpses of flesh in the past by airing the show at 10:00 pm, but the rules are different at 9:00pm. Apparently all children automatically fall into REM sleep at precisely 9:59 pm, thereby making them immune to any smut aired after ten o'clock. I mean, if they didn't, such hard and fast rules wouldn't make any sense, now would they?

According to the FCC, "We find that the programming at issue is within the scope of our indecency definition because it depicts sexual organs and excretory organs -- specifically an adult woman's buttocks."

First of all, the buttocks are not sexual organs. They're not even organs. For Charlotte Ross to reveal her sexual organs, she would have had to bend over much, much farther than she did.

There's a big difference between sexual organs and sexy. If the FCC were to fine networks for everything that men find sexually stimulating, all women on TV would be required to wear burqas.

And I love the part where the FCC describes the buttocks as "excretory organs". In my experience, the only thing the buttocks ever excrete is sweat. I don't know what those filthy pervs at the FCC imagine they saw, but the camera didn't zoom in that close.

If I sat down and looked at the FCC regulations that were in place at the time, I'm sure I'd find that ABC did violate those rules. I'm not disputing that. What I'm saying is that the rules are laughable.

Who exactly is the FCC trying to protect? More and more kids today are abandoning television for the internet where they're never more than three clicks away from Britney Spears' vagina.

And didn't the ten years of controversy regarding NYPD Blue give parents enough prep time? Surely the V-Chip and the repeated warnings during the broadcast would have saved the vast majority of America's fragile, impressionable minds - both young and old - from being exposed to this filth. This intoxicating, life-affirming, god-given filth.

Clearly this fine is either a cash grab or an attempt to appease the Christian lobbyists who make the vast majority of all complaints to the FCC anyway. I think it's time for the rest us to fight back.

If you want to contact the FCC to complain about this prudish decision, here's how to reach them:

1-888-225-5322 (1-888-CALL FCC) Voice: toll-free
1-888-835-5322 (1-888-TELL FCC) TTY: toll-free
1-866-418-0232 FAX: toll-free

Chairman Kevin J. Martin: KJMWEB@fcc.gov
Commissioner Michael J. Copps: Michael.Copps@fcc.gov
Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein: Jonathan.Adelstein@fcc.gov
Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate: dtaylortateweb@fcc.gov
Commissioner Robert McDowell: Robert.McDowell@fcc.gov


If you're in the Washington area and want to lodge a complaint in person, you can do so at the following address:

Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW
Washington, DC 20554


The FCC also has regional offices all over the country, but I can't find the addresses on their website, so if you truly want to complain in person, I'm sure the good people at the above phone numbers would help you find the nearest branch.

My suggestion for a suitable complaint would be to bring a friend with a camera and send me a picture of yourself mooning FCC headquarters, making sure to get both the FCC logo and your booty in the frame. (No excretory organs, please. This is not that kind of site.)

Since the FCC is so disturbed by the female form, I think it makes more sense to have women exposing their orifices to the FCC's offices. I won't stop men from freeing their cheeks in the name of free speech, but the FCC never had any problem with Dennis Franz, Jimmy Smits, or David Caruso dropping trou, so I think it would have more of an impact if the mooning was done by women. Preferably young, supple women with lower back tattoos.

I'll post your pictures if you send me a link to a Flickr account or some similar service, or email me at thinking (dot) idiot (at) yahoo (dot) com.

I may even dedicate a separate website to this endeavor if response warrants it.

Facebook News Network

This just in... amateur video posted on YouTube is actually worth watching.

More on this shocking story as it develops.

Is Canadian The New Black?

From the National Post comes this bizarre article:

Last August, a blogger in Cincinnati going by the name CincyBlurg reported that a black friend from the southeastern U.S. had recently discovered that she was being called a Canadian. "She told me a story of when she was working in a shop in the South and she overheard some of her customers complaining that they were always waited on by a Canadian at that place. She didn't understand what they were talking about and assumed they must be talking about someone else," the blogger wrote.

"After this happened several times with different patrons, she mentioned it to one of her co-workers. He told her that ‘Canadian' was the new derogatory term that racist Southerners were using to describe persons they would have previously referred to [with the N-word.]"

A similar case in Kansas City was reported last year on a Listserv, or electronic mailing list, used by linguistics experts. A University of Kansas linguist said that a waitress friend reported that "fellow workers used to use a name for inner-city families that were known to not leave a tip: Canadians. ‘Hey, we have a table of Canadians.... They're all yours.' "

Stefan Dollinger, a postdoctoral fellow in linguistics at University of British Columbia and director of the university's Canadian English lab, speculated that the slur reflects a sense of Canadians as the other.

"This ‘code' word, is the replacement of a no-longer tolerated label for one outsider group, with, from the U.S. view, another outsider group: Canadians. It could have been terms for Mexicans, Latinos etc. but this would have been too obvious," he said. "What's left? Right, the guys to the north."


Keeping up with modern slang can be so confusing. Does "redneck" still mean the same thing it always did?

I checked the Urban Dictionary definition of Canadian, and there it is, so that must be the online slang dictionary they refered to in the article.

Read the rest of the story here.

James Bond Will Return In... Quantum of Solace?!?!?!

The title is taken from one of a collection of short stories published by 007 creator Ian Fleming in 1960.

Um... really? This is not a hoax, or a journalistic blunder? This is the actual title for the next James Bond movie? Really?

I'm thinking Bond 22 would have looked better on a marquee.

On the plus side, I probably won't confuse this new film with any of the other Bond flicks the way I did with last few Brosnan efforts, The World Never Dies Another Day and Tomorrow Is Not Enough.

Another plus is that I already have a good title for my review of the film, should I write one...

"Quantity Of Suckage".

If the movie turns out to be good, I'll just have to find a way to make that title fit.

Quantum Of Solace... Really rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?

read more | digg story