newyorker: David Denby on “The Great Gatsby”: “Luhrmann’s vulgarity is designed to win over the young audience, and it suggests that he’s less a filmmaker than a music-video director with endless resources and a stunning absence of taste.” http://nyr.kr/1414CXu I’m not planning on seeing The Great Gatsby, but it’s from a weird aesthithics point of view. Regal Cinemas does this thing where they show clips from trailers and have the cast talk about the movie, they did that shit for at least 6 months before Les Miserables, so I’m over these hybrid trailers, but I saw one for Gatsby and it didn’t do anything for me. The glitz and techno glam of New York as shown in the trailer feels wrong. It’s like TGG takes place in the Las Vegas version of New York. The digitized chaos as described in this review feels all wrong.  I like the version of TGG that I have in my head and the bit of design I’ve seen from the movie is too loud. Things can be understated to be appreciated.  That said, if any of you want so see it, enjoy. To each their own, which is a mantra I try to remember. I don’t feel like I’m going to get anything from this interpretation of the book so I don’t want to see it, but do it up. It’s a free country and not everyone has to like the same thing.
View Separately

newyorker:

David Denby on “The Great Gatsby”: “Luhrmann’s vulgarity is designed to win over the young audience, and it suggests that he’s less a filmmaker than a music-video director with endless resources and a stunning absence of taste.” http://nyr.kr/1414CXu

I’m not planning on seeing The Great Gatsby, but it’s from a weird aesthithics point of view. Regal Cinemas does this thing where they show clips from trailers and have the cast talk about the movie, they did that shit for at least 6 months before Les Miserables, so I’m over these hybrid trailers, but I saw one for Gatsby and it didn’t do anything for me. The glitz and techno glam of New York as shown in the trailer feels wrong. It’s like TGG takes place in the Las Vegas version of New York. The digitized chaos as described in this review feels all wrong. 

I like the version of TGG that I have in my head and the bit of design I’ve seen from the movie is too loud. Things can be understated to be appreciated. 

That said, if any of you want so see it, enjoy. To each their own, which is a mantra I try to remember. I don’t feel like I’m going to get anything from this interpretation of the book so I don’t want to see it, but do it up. It’s a free country and not everyone has to like the same thing.

(via waywire)

Source: newyorker

http://slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/01/31/why_do_people_hate_anne_hathaway_one_reason_is_simple_sexism.html

The other day I told to a friend I didn’t like Anne Hathaway? Apparently there are people who super hate her, her face, her acting, her dieting for a role, her working, her existence it seems. I read this and I was like “am I being sexist” then I remembered “nope, I just kind of find her boring, except in interviews” but I also don’t hate her, I just don’t like her. I have the most rampant apathy unless I really hate something (like peta, fuck those guys).

I like actors who do something weird, daring. cutting off your hair shouldn’t be considered “daring”, acting in a critically questionable movie or tv show is daring. I like seeing actors make a movie choice that’s weird because it’s going to be fun, not because they’re strategically plotting out their careers every thing they act in. critical darlings may be good, but where is the personality in their choices? Are they being type cast after an early success, what are they doing to show they have range and that they’re not a one trick pony?

Thoughts on Superman after reading Birthright

It took 2 sittings over the course of 7 days, one Sunday then the following Sunday when I felt I had the time to read all fo Superman: Brithright. I enjoyed it well enough. I really don’t know many specifics about narratives with Superman and prior to reading this I had some of the same problems with the character that other people generally mention:

He’s too good, where is the character drama, he’s a one trick positive pony

He has too many powers and writers just add shit as necessary

He just never seemed interesting. 

His arch-enemy is just a human, that doesn’t seem fair.

Do all of his powers work all the time or is it selective? Like the hearing and the x-ray vision

When I first got into comics i picked up a collection of Alan Moore stories that had some Superman stories in it, I wasn’t too keen on him but I read the stories because i paid for them. It only makes sense. I kind of got into the drama but it still didn’t do much for me.

After reading Birthright I know what makes Superman comics interesting and it’s not Superman. It will probably never be Superman for me, he just can’t be the interesting part because he isn’t interesting. Clark Kent is the interesting part. 

Superman Birthright is less about Superman and more about Clark Kent dealing with being Superman and having to deal with it. The human connection he attempts to make are interesting, his inability to make these connections and his hiding his alien self make him interesting. As a characters, Superman shows up to save the day and gets criticized for it by other people but Clark Kent has to deal with people and is working to make himself disappear so people don’t link him to Supes. There aren’t many interactions for Superman with anyone because he’s too busy saving the day then leaving before the military or the press have the time to figure out who he is. All of his character building is based out of who Clark is. 

Thinking about those Moore stories I read they were about Superman and not Clark so they were boring. One of them it was Superman’s ‘birthday’ and Wonder Woman, Batman and Robin went to the Fortress of Solitude to celebrate but some alien villain sent a robot or something and I forgot what happened.  Supes was angsting about belonging, i think, I haven’t read it in about 4 years. That story is forgettable to me because it’s him at the top and dealing with being at the top. I remember another one where Lois knew Clark was Superman, they were married but their life sucked. Or it was a dream caused by something from the robot, I really can’t remember. 

I’m more interested in the human component of Superman comics than him being a hero. What makes him a flawed character, how do his powers and his true heritage interfere with his life? Maybe that’s why if I just picked up a comic and he was fighting aliens or other super-beings I’d be bored because i feel there’s a (human) connection missing.

I know I keep saying ‘human connection’ but I mean an emotion investment in the character and his life. What makes him feel and what makes him care other than his ability to feel life. How does that work?

Funny is growing up the 90s i didn’t watch Superman: The Animated Series, I just didn’t like the art style do I didn’t want to give it a chance. It is possibly the most mainstream opportunity I had to get to know the character as a kid. I loved Batman: The Animated Series - I guess the biggest factor then is my brothers didn’t watch it as often. There was just something that seemed dull about the character that I never really wanted to give him a chance. 

Birthright was interesting but i think because it spent so much time showing how Clark has to deal with being Superman more than it showed Superman having to deal with being Superman. i don’t think many of my judgements have been changed but if I hear of a well written Superman trade coming out i might give it a once over and decide if I want to buy it instead of always walking past and buying something else.

I guess it’s also good to say, I don’t read many superhero comics. I have some of the staples of Batman (Killing Joke, Dark Knight etc) I have a few Avengers, a small number of Iron Man, one or two Daredevil, Green Arrow and a smattering of others. I mostly read independent comics, one off narratives, or a non superhero series. I have Y: The Last Man, The Gaiman run of Sandman, Preacher, the Boys, Sin City and some other long-form comics publications but a lot of one offs. I think i like knowing that the story has an end or that I don’t feel I have to buy 20 books across 5 series to get the full narrative. It’s nice to know there is only one continuity, if someone dies they’re not going to be revived or be alive in a different plane of existence,  i think it’s nice to know that closure is a possibility and a probability. 

Can we talk about the nonsense of caring about which news outlet first reports a big piece of news? I’m not talking about a genuine scoop—a report that wouldn’t have otherwise come to light—but about news that we’re all eventually going to find out anyway. Who Mitt Romney selects to be his running-mate, for instance, or whether the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate.

I know I’m often out-of-the-loop when it comes to journalism norms and conventions, but this one honestly confounds me. Has any publication ever received a Pulitzer for being the first to report a major announcement? Is there some secret reward at stake—free cookies for a year? A trip to Hawaii? Do colleagues buy you a drink to congratulate you on beating the other networks by ten seconds?

Because if this is just about bragging rights, it needs to stop. Now. And not just because it can lead to some outlets rushing to report incorrect information, as CNN and FOX did with the recent Supreme Court decision on health care reform. But because the race to be first is no longer just a feature of news coverage but often the main factor driving it.

Amy Sullivan, The New Republic. Who Reported It First? Who Cares?

With the Supreme Court about to announce their decision on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act our (mostly cable) media were chomping at the bit to be first out of the gate with some BREAKING NEWS.

CNN, as we know, fell flat on its face. It’s been struck down, they reported incorrectly. Their amplification machine went into overdrive with banner headlines on CNN.com and posts on social media until Wolf Blitzer — in purely Wolf Blitzer moment — helpfully illuminated us all.

“It’s getting a little more complicated,” he said.

As Sullivan points out: “His remark, of course, referred to the network’s own coverage. The court’s decision couldn’t have gotten more complicated because it was final, set down on paper.”

Sullivan’s article is well worth the read. Yes, there’s some importance to speed, she writes, but the media focuses too much on getting it first on too many stories where getting it first really isn’t important. Like, say, a Supreme Court announcement that everyone will hear about when it’s actually announced.

If the topic interests you, check out her follow-up. And if your journo-geekery runs real deep, head over to SCOTUSblog where Tom Goldstein walks 7,000 plus words through a minute by minute account of how CNN and Fox got their reporting wrong, and who the whole media scrum works in cases such as this.

(via futurejournalismproject)

I Was a Right-wing Child Star

I felt justified in my beliefs if for no other reason than no one actually told me I was wrong. Instead, men like Bill Bennett and Newt Gingrich hailed me as the voice for my generation and a hope for America.

But then, earlier this week, Politico released an interview in which I announced I wasn’t a conservative anymore — and the proverbial crap hit the fan. Since then, I have been treated by the political right with all the maturity of schoolyard bullies.

Read on to the rest of this, I feel this is on par with seeing photos of children at any political rally, they don’t understand what they’re being used to represent. And it’s humorous which makes for more entertaining reading. 

Source: salon.com

Adoptees Call For A Boycott Of The Avengers | Bleeding Cool Comic Book, Movies and TV News and Rumors

I don’t want to call the families of adopted children too sensitive for this reaction, my younger sister was adopted into my family, but I kind of feel as if they’re missing the point. With the pull quote used here it misses the set up for the joke and who the joke is on. Iit detracts from the end of Thor and earlier moments in The Avengers when Thor knowing Loki is adopted runs around just saying ‘he’s my brother’ and not ‘he’s my adopted brother’. Which when compared to Loki’s opinion of the entire thing they’re not related and Thor needs to die/leave him alone. 

I kind of agree with the other points addressed that people are prescribing one thing to Whedon and the movie that they disagree with and not commenting on some of the larger overarching ideas that the characters expound on for more of the narrative. 

Slut Bitch Whore

michaelianblack:

Everybody is outraged – OUTRAGED! – over language hurled against women these last few weeks. First it was Rush Limbaugh. Then Bill Maher. Now Louis C.K. has resigned from hosting the Radio and TV Correspondent’s Dinner after Greta Van Susteren threatened a boycott because during the last election Louis called Sarah Palin a cunt.

From Greta Van Susteren’s blog: “he changed his mind less than 24 hours after I called for a boycott.  I assume many others jumped on the call for the boycott and thus he made the right decision.  We did it together.”

 

Sincere congratulations to Ms. Van Susteren. You asked for his removal and you got it. The lesson: words have consequences. His words, your words, everybody’s words. Mr. Rogers would be thrilled.

 

No word yet on Ms. Van Susteren success in her boycott of Rush Limbaugh’s show because no such boycott exists. Why the selective outrage? Because, as always, these things have far less to do with what was said and more to do with who said them. Like the words themselves, they have to be viewed in context.

 

The difference between what Louis said, and what Rush said is this: in his apology, Rush made a point of saying that his personal attacks on Ms. Fluke, were not intended “as a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.”  

In other words, when he specifically called Sandra Fluke a “slut,” “a prostitute,” and encouraged her to post sex videos of herself online so he could watch, it was not personal. It was, therefore, general. Which I, for one, believe because it fits perfectly within the larger context of Rush Limbaugh’s twenty-plus years of ad hominem attacks on “feminazis” and gratuitous comments about all female journalists as “news babes.”

With Louis, his insult was actually the opposite: it was a highly personal attack. The target of his insult, Sarah Palin, so infuriated him that he felt the need to call her the very worst name he could think of. His insult referred to a specific woman at a specific time and place.

Did Louis cross the line? Yeah. Did Bill Maher? Yeah. Have I at times? Yeah. Has Greta Van Susteren ever crossed the line? Have you, in your personal conversations? Yeah. We all have. The difference is context. Do a Google search of the horrible shit Rush Limbaugh has said about women. Then do a search on Louis C.K.  See if it’s comparable.

Louis did use those words, and opted to drop out of an incestuous Washington dinner party rather than make himself the focus of this recurring debate on language. But the reason more people don’t give a shit about what Louis C.K. said is not because of a liberal bias – does anybody even know what Louis C.K.’s politics are, aside from hating Sarah Palin (a sentiment shared by many Republicans)?– but because the charge of misogyny just doesn’t hold a lot of water with Louis.

With Rush it does. Regular listeners to Rush Limbaugh’s program, as I have been for years, are not surprised when he finds himself lambasted for his petulance, name-calling, and race baiting. It’s what he does. He’s kind of a cunt that way.

I think it is interesting that people in the public eye are held up to such different standards, I mean, people do say offensive things on the daily but it gets swept under the rug. It is interesting who has the power over words and how people react. I apologetically curse and say defamatory things all the time on my blogs, but I’m a no one and people never retort, so it is nice being a nobody spouting my opinion in my own words on the Internet all the time. I have called many people cunts in real life and online, but I have also questioned it’s use, but rarely when people are called it because they probably are. I mean, why isn’t it as offensive to call someone a cock or a dick but cunt is the worst most vile-ist word?

Anywho, I think that MIB brings up some interesting thoughts on language, it’s power and the strength of the speaker with how people respond.

Punching Down

guttersnipercomics:

So, despite the mega-bummer-storm of the recent Gary Friedrich super-screwing/Before Watchmen/Avengers movie boycott/Walking Dead profits controversy, I’ve tried to stay positive about the losing battle that is being a comics fan, but a couple things have really stuck in my craw the last few weeks. It really started with this tweet from Brian Michael Bendis:

Ugh. Super asinine, right? As a person who (sort of) reviews comics and (sort of) knows a lot of people who do it very well, I took umbrage at the fact that Mr. Bendis set such arbitrary boundaries for criticism in order for him to consider it valid.

So of course I shot my mouth off. 

Read More

This is an interesting discussion on criticism. I also happen to spend a lot of time criticism things here and on blogger, but reviews are steeped in opinion. I mean, sharing a review is just artfully writing your own opinion on something else while taking the time to be a bit objective about it so people with different opinions might get something useful out of it. 

Thoughts

Whenever I see posts that say something like “you’re beautiful, don’t let anyone tell you otherwise” I want to respond to the poster and the multitude of people to write the same stupid thing over and over one thing.

It’s not about other people dissing me or insulting me, it’s about my not having faith in myself and deciding i’m not attractive or I’m not special. Any time I tell me friends i’m feeling depressed and I try to explain why they present me with opposition to all of my weak willed thoughts and opinions. My friends are the first people to defend me from myself because I don’t value myself as much as they do. It makes me value them that much more because sometimes I really need to just be told I’m being an idiot. Because sometimes i’m just being an idiot. 

robdelaney:

My least favorite people (at this second) are people who feel Obama “let them down” or “didn’t deliver on his promise.” Guys, “HOPE” was a one syllable slogan, a logo even, to get a corporate backed, big D Democrat elected in a cash contest. People like you are THE SAME THING as the “undecided” Republican caucus voters in Iowa being interviewed now and saying they’re not sure which candidate’s message (i.e. lies) resonates most with them. 

I didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 (I CERTAINLY didn’t vote for McCain) but I’ll vote for him next year. The 2 party system is garbage and will ruin our country if we don’t amend it to at the very least include run-off elections, but the Republican party is composed almost exclusively of actual psychos and morons, while the Democratic party is maybe 65% psycho/moron. So even if you view it as biting the bullet and choosing the lesser of two evils, the Democratic party (right now, in 2011) is measurably “less evil.” (See health care, education, civil rights, etc.) Step out of your current fantasy chamber and enter another where the House Republicans who embarrassed the nation with their manufactured debt crisis are tasked with responding to a 9/11-level nightmare. Imagine too that one of them now occupies the Oval Office. Soak that up for a minute.

Obama let you down? Blow it out your ass. He’s a multi-millionaire career politician who doesn’t know you exist, you sissy, but he might be the reason your grandkids have health insurance.

(via OUR VALUED CUSTOMERS:) I’ve looked over this comic on more than one occasion and it’s just dull. The statements aren’t that amusing in their idiocy and it’s too repetitive. It’s one expression in every post. Men and women tend to look the same, so it’s supposed to draw attention to the criticisms from the customers but it just seem uninspired. The line art doesn’t really capture me and this doesn’t seem  sunken in any world. I know these are overheards and things said to him at work, but half the time the statements could have been said anywhere and he just happened to document the comic or geeky ones. Everyone knows customers say stupid things, but these aren’t really funny stupid things. He just seems bitter and it’s just cathartic for him to draw crude caricatures of people in this shop, which is all well and good, but it doesn’t seem to go anywhere. I can’t see where this might progress to or how it might evolve into something more fufiling. 
View Separately

(via OUR VALUED CUSTOMERS:)

I’ve looked over this comic on more than one occasion and it’s just dull. The statements aren’t that amusing in their idiocy and it’s too repetitive. It’s one expression in every post. Men and women tend to look the same, so it’s supposed to draw attention to the criticisms from the customers but it just seem uninspired. The line art doesn’t really capture me and this doesn’t seem  sunken in any world. I know these are overheards and things said to him at work, but half the time the statements could have been said anywhere and he just happened to document the comic or geeky ones.

Everyone knows customers say stupid things, but these aren’t really funny stupid things. He just seems bitter and it’s just cathartic for him to draw crude caricatures of people in this shop, which is all well and good, but it doesn’t seem to go anywhere. I can’t see where this might progress to or how it might evolve into something more fufiling. 

Source: ourvaluedcustomers