As much as I hate those local news teams with names like "Problem Solvers" or "Defenders", I think it would be a fun job. I was actually about to title this post "MNSTREAM: Problem Solvers", but I thought that title sounded a little banal. The weird thing was, I couldn't think of anything more clever/amusing/vulgar. This even after giving it almost 2 minutes of thought. So, one of the following two things is currently happening: I'm either mentally slipping (highly unlikely, especially considering I've been drinking less), or this whole blogging business is becoming more comfortable and thus increasing my apathy (bingo). Nevertheless, I woke up ridiculously early this morning and had a proverbial ass-load of time on my hands. I began to think. Hard. I started off on video games that haven't been made into movies yet but show excellent potential. That topic is always an old standby in my noggin (and probably a post in the not-too-distant-future). So one thing led to another and eventually, I began to think about some of the more utile problems that John Everyman is facing in America today, and like all superb thinkers, I came up with one solution to solve two problems.
I am one of many people who I consider "news perusers". We news perusers - and boy are we aplenty - employ a rigid regimen when seeking out our daily news items. We start where everyone else does: the front page. That probably goes without saying. Or writing. Whatever. Moving on. I prefer my news from two sources, depending on my mood that day. For me, it's The New York Times or USA Today. The NYT is for those go-getter type days, whereas USA Today is for those mornings after 5+ beers; when you wake up with those annoying quasi-hangovers but you actually have somewhere to be so you can't just sleep until noon.
Within the past month or so, I've noticed a steady increase in articles pertaining to the airlines. Specifically, articles dealing with new luggage policies. To combat the rising cost of fuel, many airlines are now charging people a fee if they're bringing a second checked piece of baggage. For whatever reason, it seems as if America is outraged by these new policies, and for the life of me I cannot understand why. Let us crack wise about some soft-core economics. I'm about to make fellow 'streamer Kevin (a self-proclaimed "econ slap-dick") very proud. The following is a very simple explanation for the new luggage fees intended for the dumb.
Quick sidebar: Just for fun, I am going to compose parts of this diatribe in the style of a professor who is close to retirement and mailing in the last couple years of her professional life while making no efforts to disguise her complete ambiguity towards the progress made by his students. Also, this professor shows nothing but utter contempt for any students she think may be falling behind the curve. (I made it a her and I'm naming her Professor Miller, after a woman I perceived to be the meanest 5th grade teacher ever conceived in the fires of Hades. She would actually mock the occasional kid in class who wasn't grasping things on the quick. Total opposite of Mr. Durnian, but that's a separate story for a separate time.)
IMPORTANT: If you are not dumb, please feel free to skip ahead to whenever. I really don't give a sh*t. I'm admittedly not super-savvy in economics (seriously, Kevin's turf), but it seems to me that the airlines are acting in a way top scientists call "normal". I feel like we learned this is high school. Jet fuel is - for all intents and purposes in the argument herein - a raw material that the airlines need to provide their service. We call this service "the flight" or if you prefer, "when they take you from one place to the other place". Brace yourselves for another self-disqualifying statement: I'm not an expert in aeronautics. Still though, I am relatively certain that the planes need some sort of jet fuel to..... uhhh.... go. So when the price of jet fuel goes up, the cost incurred by the airlines - on every flight they operate - goes up as well. In order to keep their profits steady while their cost increases, they need to increase revenues. That means they need more money to come in from the consumers (That's You, America!!! Wheee!!!). The way that companies traditionally increase revenue - assuming no growth in sales - is by increasing the price the consumer pays. I hope everyone's still with me. If you went to an SEC school (I'm not sure why but recently I've been really dogging SEC schools), don't be ashamed to re-read this paragraph. In fact, I suggest you do because we're about to apply this concept to a real-world example.
Welcome back if you napped during the remedial lecture. So, what's the second problem. More importantly, what's the solution that can simultaneously solve both problems? I'm glad you asked. We're about to do what some incredibly insufferable people call - ad nauseam - "thinking outside the box". Simply put, the second problem that is hanging onto our country like a big mother-effin' albatross is obesity. You all know the gist of this issue and have probably heard a plethora of stats, so I won't waste your time (this happens rarely). Let's delve into the panacea. Where do obesity and the rapidly rising costs of air travel intersect? Noted über-thinkmaster Albert Einstein once said, "When the solution is simple, God is answering." I couldn't have said it better myself. That's actually probably why I used the quote. I may be overly cocksure in my "thinkiness", but Einstein is still The Man, as far as thinking goes.
Solution: First, rule out the practice of enacting universal hikes in ticket prices and realize this simple truth: if a plane is carrying less weight, it will get better gas mileage. Oh, wait a second folks. Let's pause as we bring in our special guest, The Obvious Warrior. The Obvious Warrior tells us, "If a plane can travel a few more miles for every gallon of gas used, that small difference will eventually accumulate into that plane using thousands of dollars less in fuel!" Thanks, Obv Warrior. It was good to see you again. I guess the next time I'll see you will be at my wedding rehearsal dinner when you'll tell me how the fun part of my life is about to end. Seeya then. ANYWAYS, the point is that universal rate hikes are unfair. Blanket fare increase have the same effect on the triathlete (who's only bringing his backpack) as they do on Ruben from American Idol (and his 49.9-pound checked bag plus the McDonald's bag full of apple pies). Here is what the airlines should do in lieu of a blanket increase in fares: calculate a person's airfare based on the total weight (bags, jewelry, on-deck dookies) they will be bringing onto the plane. Now, before we get all exasperated from mounting the counter-argument for the overweight, let's stipulate an exception. If a doctor (not a personal trainer or a dietician but an actual, real medical doctor) vouches that the passenger in question has little or no reasonable way to lose weight while staying healthy, that person will get a ticket for the price that corresponds to the average weight of their gender. I don't know what the exact fare-calculation formula would be, and far be it from me to even pretend I would know where to begin, but we've got to have math guys who could whip this up lickety-split, right? When they get on that, it'll be a whole new ballgame. Also, maybe buy some stock in Dexatrim (and/or the like) and sell your shares of Frito-Lay. As long as people want to fly, there could be a real shakedown on Wall Street.
Think of the benefits. You've undoubtedly heard the term "vicious circle", but I bet not nearly as many people have heard "virtuous cycle". That's probably because it doesn't roll off the tongue as well. It really doesn't sound as cool. Regardless, this solution sets up a virtuous cycle. People who need to fly - and happen to be overweight - will have the ultimate incentive to get trim and healthy (and stay that way): money in their pockets. Subsequently, the loads carried by our airplanes will get lighter and lighter, and the planes will gradually burn less and less ultra-costly fuel. America gets healthier, and once we observe plane loads getting lighter, the pressure will be on the airlines to lower their rates. Their "rising fuel cost" answer to everything will be negated by the popular evidence of better m.p.g. on the planes, and the rates will come down. Of course, not a single word of this will matter if we can find a better source of energy. Good talk.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Weird Topics, Ahoy!
// God Bless the Internet. It's hard for me to fathom how many hours of enjoyment I've gotten from the blah-blah type stuff. Addictive games, fantasy sports, YouTubes of animals being wacky; they've been great. I really love it though when I stumble onto something that's truly neat and original. The above image came from this site. It's pretty simple: people post their pictures of "extended album art", and it's exactly what it sounds like. Take an album cover, crop it and/or combine it with other images to make the album cover look like it's extending. I was amazed by some of the results. Staring at these makes me think, "There are some hyper-creative people out there." Then I wonder why television shows have gotten progressively worse since the mid-90s. It's a valid thought, but trust me: don't go down that road. It's dark and lonely.
// R. Kelly's trial is not going well, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. Two days and twelve witnesses? Are you freaking kidding me? You mean to tell me that even despite the glacial pace of today's courtrooms, the R.'s lawyers got through 12 witnesses in two days? Are they running 24-hr. courts in Cook County? How did those questionings go?
Defense: State your name for the court, please.
Witness: Charles Palm.
Defense: How cool is R. Kelly?
Witness: Hmm... not sure. I think my daughter listens to him.
Defense: Nothing further, your Honor.
Just a total bummer. I really hate it when musicians/actors/athletes that I really enjoy do bad things. You used to be able to do the moonwalk from Billie Jean down the street. Nowadays, I think twice before announcing to new people that I love Michael Jackson's music. And that's given the fact he was acquitted! Yes, I know that by liking Michael's music I'm not endorsing his (alleged) lifestyle or decisions, but there's still a stigma there. No matter how you word it, there's a chance people will perceive your affinity for a person's past work to be some warped de facto support of their transgressions. That's the unbearable part. First we lose Michael, and now your boy Kellllllllllls? I guess the hope is that 1) he's innocent, 2) he gets an acquittal, and 3) he files countersuits against the plaintiff and the prosecution's office. After reading that article (et al), that scenario seems like a long shot.
// Apparently, I've been very lucky during my lifetime of Detroit Tiger fandom. I really didn't even know ballparks could be this decrepit, but according to this report, there exists some heinous conditions at several ballparks throughout the States. If I were an Angels fan, I'd probably get a VD test, just to be safe. Also, I'd maybe drink some of those AIDS milkshakes that keep Magic on the up and up. Kind of a "why not" thing, y'know? Actually, let's think about that question. Why not drink the AIDS milkshakes? Can those hurt you if you don't have the HIV? I'll admit that I'm curious to see if they taste good or not. One would assume they could put the medicine part into a regular milkshake or something, right? It would probably just taste like a regular milkshake then (read: outstanding)! Seems like a win-win. Either you are HIV-positive, and the milkshake is helping you manage that pickle, or you don't have the virus. Then, you're just drinking a delicious treat! Hard to see the downside, but then again, I could be way off. It's hard to imagine those things being some sort of Dairy Queen taste-alike AND curbing the havoc caused by AIDS. It sounds a shade too good to be true. Something that is so powerful that it can hold its own with AIDS has at least the potential to taste a little off.
// I am a fan of good ideas. You can try to dissuade me all you want, but in my book, good ideas will always be WAYYY better than bad ideas. Here is a good idea worthy of The Good Idea Hall of Fame (located anywhere in the world except in a state that's home to an SEC school). Titled "Wants For Sale", this project is simultaneously simple and genius. These people paint pictures of something that they want (hence the title). John and Jane consumer then purchase the paintings. The paintings are priced at the cost of the item(s) depicted on them, and the money received by the artists for the painting is then used to purchase the subject of the now-sold painting. It might be the coolest thing I've ever seen, and it really chaps me. Why? Because the illustrations in question aren't that good. They're not bad... but they're most definitely not exceptional. I think I'm just salty because I didn't think of this first. Being a very homogenized mix of smart AND dumb, I get the pleasure of experiencing this feeling of "jealous I didn't think of it first" about 1,000 times per year. Not good times. Bad times.
// Having family members who live with diabetes, I thought this was kind of neat. Somewhere down the line, this will definitely prove helpful. Perhaps even lifesaving.
// I'll admit it: I mailed in the video ender for this post. Finding worthwhile videos that people haven't seen before can sometimes be a tall order. So here's a clip from Arrested Development from which I stole the go-to catch phrase I currently employ. Hasta luego.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Soapbox = Nice View
+ ***WARNING: POSSIBLE SPOILER FOR "TROPIC THUNDER"*** The word on the street is that Tom Cruise has finally gotten wise. Lemme ask you this: In today's mean, cynical pop culture world, what's the quickest way to go from being a disliked social pariah to being the "He's Not That Bad/That Was Actually Pretty Funny" guy? Self-deprecating humor. The best examples I can think of are Conan O'Brien and Larry David. Few know this (I myself am too young to remember), but Conan's ratings absolutely sucked when he first got Late Night. He was thought of as too goofy for hosting; that his best medium for expressing his humor was as a writer, away from the cameras. His self-depreciation epiphany turned his whole career arc around and next year he's moving up to the 11:35 slot. Larry David's case is a little different. Obviously, Seinfeld was tremendous, but it was his little-known film Sour Grapes (made right after Seinfeld) that had people wondering if LD's funniest days were behind him. Enter Curb, the hilarious success widely hailed as one of the funniest TV shows ever. Much like Conan's monologues after '97, CYE is chock-full of self-deprecating jokey jokes. So... Tom Cruise? In a little less than 2 years, he went from Biggest Movie Star On Earth (yeah, I'd even put him ahead of Tom Hanks in the early/mid '00s) to "dude, Cruise is kinda weird" to everyone thinking he's either insane or a homosexual with the world's best-looking beard. The word on the street is that Tommy's return to people not hating him comes in the form of his (intended) surprise cameo as an obese, bald, idiotic, and yes... Hollywood Scientologist movie studio exec. Methinks this will pay dividends for the former-golden-boy-now-vessel-for-an-alien-soul. And truthfully, I hope it does because as wacky as some of his beliefs seem sometimes, if everyone took a step back we'd realize that making fun of the dude's religion isn't very nice.
+ Taboo Conversation: To clarify that last point, I'd like to climb up into my little ivory tower for a moment. Scientology, though it's views and history seem slightly outrageous to a lot of people (yours truly included), is a legitimate religion. All alien jokes aside (nice 180° considering I just made an alien joke), if that's what the followers believe, that's their business and they have a right to express that belief. The disagreements arise when Scientologists and non-Scientologists alike take these stories in a strictly literal sense. I'm of the opinion that most religious historical accounts are meant to be figurative so they function as better teaching tools. I think that if more people embraced that point of view, there'd be a lot less verbal barbs and discriminatory attitudes about any religion. At the risk of offending almost everyone I've ever known/met, I'll say that regarding a comparison of the teachings of the Bible and the teachings of Scientology: I perceive some of the stories in the Old and New Testaments to have a similar degree of hard-to-believe plot elements. It's not hard to be dubious about Jonah getting swallowed by a whale, somehow surviving for an extended period of time, and then being vomited out healthy enough for travel, only to become deathly ill when he sits out in the sun. While the plot - when taken word-for-word literally - seems maybe a bit implausible, the lessons from these stories are what we learn. To sum up: Scientologists have some beliefs that many people are skeptical about, but that situation is similar, if not almost exactly like, the dubiousness faced by Christians in the early go. I might be going to hell now, but at least I made my point on a blog. Hopefully God is one of those "take it easy" omnipotent beings.
+ Is this uniform an exercise is bad design and idiocy? Or is it a stroke of genius? Let's start aesthetically. The red looks kinda silly and I'm not a huge fan of vests, let alone red ones with yellow trim (McDonald's anyone?). That said, doesn't that jersey evoke - even a little - thoughts about pirates? I can't look at that uniform and not see shades of a pirate. Give the dude a righteous hat and an eye patch and presto!- he's an extra standing next to Johnny Depp. Younahit? Younahit.
+ About two months ago, I watched the Katt Williams HBO Comedy Special The Pimp Chronicles Pt. 1. First off, I was very pleasantly surprised. I wasn't expecting too laugh as much, primarily because sometimes I don't totally understand what black comedians are talking about. (FYI: I'm kind of white. Women be shoppin'.) Au contraire, it was maybe the funniest comedy special I've ever seen. Getting to the point, one of his funniest jokes dealt with the difference between party attitudes in white people and black people. Without putting too fine a point on it: Williams contends that black people are more apt to - as he says - "take it eeeaaaasy" whilst out on the town, while white people are infinitely more gung-ho about getting as intoxicated as possible. True or not, his delivery was full of candor and made for a funny joke. I wouldn't have reacted to this in nearly the same manner had I not seen Katt Williams' show. Seriously, the tagline for the drink is, "Slow Your Roll." I thought alcohol was already a depressant. They should have called it "Coma-Toast". I'm so clever, I'm stealing my dad's jokes.
+ From Italian artist Maurizio Savini, these absolutely incredible sculptures made from chewing gum. I think these are really cool, but I can't look at them without thinking of two things. 1) I really should make an effort and finally settle on a favorite gum: Bubblemint Orbit or Mint Mojito Orbit. 2) My blood begins to boil when I imagine some nose-in-the-air bohemian dismissing these sculptures as "proletarian" or "illegitimate". Here's a question: who decides if certain art is kitschy? Who decides if it's legitimate? I remember AP English (side note: I thought for about 5 minutes on whether or not to make it a point to include the "AP" and in the end I just figured f*ck it and I pointed to myself with my own thumbs) and our teacher dismissed the story of Star Wars as illegitimate. Despite my intense, borderline erotic affinity for the stories, I wasn't really offended. More curious. Why is that story not "legitimate"? It draws inspiration from some of the most tumultuous times in human history, the movies (at least Eps. IV & V) have well-developed characters facing major dilemmas with huge ramifications, there are (multiple) well-thought-out storylines, and those storylines eventually intersect in tense, dramatic fashion. So what makes the story kitschy? Is it the lasers? Does a story become illegitimate if it features any lasers? How about robots? Is a story considered "made for the stupid" if it's set in the future/distant past/distant galaxy/different realm? If the characters are not talking in a language that frustrates high schoolers, is the story not considered to be valuable? If someone can explain to me why fictional stories like Star Wars or Gladiator or even Lord of the Rings are illegitimate, I'd love to hear it. To me, the stories favored by academia (par ejemplo: Harrison Bergeron, Dr. Faustus, Inferno) have the same level of "legitimacy" as the stories enjoyed by the bigger portion of the populace.
+ I'm getting pretty good at Spanish. Out of the two languages I've studied (German being the other), Spanish has a more broad application. No duh, right? Then why the mention? Because I'm congratulating myself. It's what I do. There have been very few things throughout my life that I've actually chosen to learn, and there's been even fewer times in my life where I've thought about the benefits of something long-term (long-term for me: anything after the upcoming week). It just seems to make sense though. I'd be willing to bet that by the time I'm 30, I'll be in constant contact (either through work or a neighbor or whatev) with a person that speaks Español as a first language. If that turns out to not be the case, it'll always be in the back pocket for some questionable dirty talk with the wife.
+ Video Ender: This isn't a funny video at all, and the violence is borderline NSFW so take note. I liked it because I like The Warriors and any other movie featuring young people taking it to the streets for no reason. Perhaps not in this violent of a manner, but screw it. Also, that song in the background gets me all kinds of fired up. Enjoy, I guess. Maybe not.
The Week Ahead, Indy Review, & "The Finals" Game 2
+ Yep, that is a pair of Nike Dunks with the new "lobster" color way. I'm a sneakerhead and am usually down with all flavors (especially gnarly-colored Nikes), but this might be going a shade too far. I can see you liking these if you're a chowd from New England with a penchant for fly kicks. Other than that, owning these might be a stretch. Despite all the neat little contextual design points - the blue "claw straps", the butter-colored laces, the tablecloth-esque interior fabric - these are just a little too out there for a night at the pub. A mac-n-cheese shoe, on the other hand...
+ Pretty big week on the entertainment front. The Incredible Hulk opens on Friday. That's pretty ironic because I was thinking to myself this weekend, "You know what kind of movie I want to see? I want to see a non-sequel remake movie - that no one asked for - to a movie that came out like 5 years ago and was so bad that the franchise itself became a lost cause. That's the kind of movie Hollywood should be throwing at me." Edward Norton might be enough to make this movie bearable, and I hear that Bobby Downey has a cameo as Tony Stark, but I still am leaning heavy on waiting for this gem on DVD. Aside from the continued Marvel Comics film bombardment, Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is hitting stores Thursday. For past MGS fans like myself, this most recent (and sadly, final) installment has been eagerly anticipated for over a year. I'm expecting pretty big things. And I know everyone cares.
+ Also on the weekend movie docket, The Happening. M. Night Shyamalan's newest WTF-Fest of a movie looks like all of his other movies post-Sixth Sense. That is, pointless and overly "intelligent". Intelligent is in quotes because I think Shyamalan is under the impression he's making better movies than he really is. An M. Night Shyamalan movie is basically him acting as a magician. I think a lot of magicians get off on knowing the solution to something that the audience is unaware of. Jerry Seinfeld once wrote of magicians: "They're like, 'Here's a quarter. Now it's gone. You're a jerk.'" I think there's some truth to that. Magicians don't reveal their secrets. Why? It's not some sort of "honor code" as they would have you believe. They get their jollies from knowing something that the audience members don't. It's like subconsciously they're thinking, "Hahaha. These people are imbeciles." That's what Shyamalan thinks as he's making his movie. His obligatory twists at the end are just his ways of saying, "See? You don't even have the mental capacity to think of that. Ergo, I'm way smarter and more creative than you proles."
+ I finally got a chance to see Indy this weekend. My thoughts on the movie were similar to those I had regarding Die Hard4. The similarities are frustratingly striking. In both, we had former action stars whose previous movies were done with excellent (read: real) special effects. The car chase scenes in DH: With a Vengeance, the mine cart scene in Indy & The Temple. These were done with actual, tangible humans and machines. The action was real and it was awesome. In the time elapsed between the franchises' third and fourth installments, we came up with much better CGI capability. But here's a memo to all of Hollywood (and especially George Lucas, who has now made more bad movies than good movies): JUST BECAUSE CGI EXISTS DOES NOT MEAN WE HAVE TO USE IT EVERY TIME SOMEONE THROWS A PUNCH OR JUMPS IN THE AIR. That pretty much sums up my feeling on Indy, as it was a movie whose first act was great just because we got to see Dr. Jones again, but then it fell apart because George Lucas and Steven Spielberg think people want to watch video games when they go to a movie theatre. Unless you're utilizing technology that doesn't actually exists (spaceships, complex robots, 100 Agent Smiths, and yes Mr. Lucas, lightsabers) you don't need to use CGI. Figure out a way to make your script actually happen. You've done it before, remember? Back when you made good movies?
+ There are parallels that can be drawn from the Celtics' successes against the Lakers and the Pistons' victory back in 2004. The main reason LA finds themselves down 0-2: the Celts play better defense and are much better on the glass. Pau Gasol, for all his skills, isn't taking full advantage of when he's being guarded by Kendrick Perkins and that's putting more pressure on Kobe and Odom. Heading back to LA will provide the Lakers a much-needed shot in the arm, but I don't think they can get 4 of 5 from the Celts, not with two more games in Beantown. My prediction: this will go down the same way as the 2005 Finals (Pistons/Spurs). LA will take the first two back home, the Celts will steal Game 5, LA will play its best game in Game 6, but the home-court advantage is too much to overcome twice in a row and in a Game 7 for the books, your 2008 NBA Champs will be the Boston Celtics. I guess it'll be nice to finally see a team from Boston excel. They need more media coverage over there.
+ Lastly, this one comes from my (former & future, you read that right) roommate Ben. Don't expect to enjoy this if you're in serious mode. It's absurd - but absurdly excellent - comedy.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Election Analogy, New Math, & The Finals.
+ Obnoxious, possibly offensive poster? Maybe. First black presidential candidate? Oddly enough, also maybe. Hillary has basically said she's conceding... but she didn't say she's conceding. These semantics are reminiscent of those stereotypical mafia sit-down talks in the movies. The one confused guy says, "So you're saying that if I kill that du-." Then he's interrupted, "No... we're not saying that. But if we were..." IT'S SO STUPID! At this point, she's just coming out on the short end of the PR stick. You know what Hillary is like? Picture you're at a pick up game of softball. You're on the home team. You're going into the ninth inning down by a run, but in the top of the 9th, the other team scores one. So Hillary's the third batter due up in the bottom of the ninth. When she's up to bat, there's two outs and none on. She works the count full and is really making a great effort to keep the team alive. In the 12th pitch of the at-bat, she hits a hot grounder to short. It's a close play at first, but Hillary is called out. As of right now, Hillary is basically standing on first screaming at the ump that she was safe, but EVERYONE ELSE ON THE FIELD has agreed that she was out and is now packing up the gear and making their way to the parking lot. Sooner than later I hope she realizes when it's time to pack it in and go grab a beer.
+ I was walking around campus today and I saw a dude in a wheelchair. I think it might've been a motorized but he was going on his own power. Considering it was like 90˚F out today, I thought about offering him assistance getting up a piece of the sidewalk that was at about at 25-degree grade. Then, I thought about the possibility that this might offend him. As my decision deadline approached. I came up with the following formula that can be used in all situations where you're considering aiding the disabled people you come across in your day-to-day:
IHPR(O) + S ≤ AHPR + PS(T)
Whereas:
IHPR = Incredulous Handicapped Person's Response
O = Offensive Quality Multiplier
SU = Shame Units
AHPR = Appreciative Handicapped Person's Response
PS = Personal Satisfaction
T = Number of Thumbs Up given by the crowd around you
If the equation is true, you take the risk and help. If the equation is false, put your head down and bob your head to your iPod so it looks like you're focused on the music.
+ Boy, what an awesome Game 1 of The Finals (by the way: it's not "the Finals", it's "The Finals". ABC has been very clear on this for like four years now. I think they want "The Finals" to get the same kind of caché as "The Masters"). Seriously, what a gutty performance by Paul Pierce. He went down HARD in the 3rd. So hard in fact, he had to have some teammates carry him to the sidelines and then be wheelchaired into the locker room where - according to Michelle Tafoya - doctors pleaded with him not to put ANY weight on his right knee. Someway, somehow, Pierce came back on the floor in 5 minutes, channeling his inner Willis Reed. How would he fare on the court? It clearly became evident that Pierce was suffering from what doctors call... absolutely nothing. He wasn't even limping. Five minutes after crying his way through the hallway. C'mon Paul, you gotta sell me better than that.
+ Recently, I read about a game you can play called "KG That". Basically, you go through your everyday normal motions. Get up, take a shower, eat a bowl of Rice Chex, whatever. If anything remotely goes in your favor, even if it was expected, you KG That. Excuse me, you KG THAT SH*T!!! Get an extra quarter back in change from the pop machine? GO APESH*T! Write your last name across the chest of your shirt and pop it out! Let those motherf*ckers know what you're reppin'! Did you order your potato skin appetizer in a better manner than most others? AAAARRRGGGHHHH!!!!! THAT'S HOW YOU ORDER TATE-SKEEZY'S BITCH!!!! Seriously though, try it out in private at first. When you're comfortable enough, unleash it on the public. Need inspiration? Oops...
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
More Links Than Scotland
+ Per the above photo: Have you ever taken one of those "Are You an Alcoholic?"-type tests where it asks you to check off all the "If you've ever..." boxes? They start off with innocent ones like "If you've ever had a drink to 'get loose' at a social function." Then they gradually get more and more unsavory? The last one is like, "If you've ever ran over a child whilst slugging a bottle of J.D. and listening to Kenny Loggins?" You look at the thing and there's like 50 boxes and you've answered honestly and you're scoring in the mid-20s. Standard. Then you look at the results: "If you've answered 'yes' to more than 4, you might be an alcoholic. Seek counsel immediately." That's what I felt like looking at this sign. There's pretty much no way I'm not going to hell. (By the way: Sports Fans? Seriously? I can't even imagine a single reason to include sports fans.)
+ Movie Mania: For me, I feel slightly more giddy about Burn After Reading (NSFW) than I do The Dark Knight. Odd, because I drink the superhero Kool-Aid as much as anyone. It's just that those Coen boys make such interesting movies and after No Country, their return to dark comedy is greatly appreciated.
+ In other movie news that will blow your mind, here comes The Onion Movie. Hailed as "The Kentucky Fried Movie for Our Generation", the straight-to-DVD feature dropped yesterday. Do yourself a favor: rent Kentucky Fried, then peep Onion. Fellow 'Streamer Kevin introduced me to KFM in like 2000 and I laughed so hard my ribs and jaw ached all night. True story.
+ Games Radar chronicles The Worst Celebrity Renders of All-Time. I'd disagree with about half of them, especially considering how hard it used to be to translate Val Kilmer's glorious mug into a 32-bit cacophony. Still though, some are horribly funny.
+ While I still - at almost 23 years old - don't get a lot of their cartoons, there's no denying that The New Yorker has some very entertaining/interesting/quasi-useful articles. Case in point: their recent dissection of the hangover.
+ Someone Got Fired For: In the U.K., there exists a department called the Office of Government Commerce. Recently, they decided they needed a fresh, new logo (probably so they'd seem hip to the kids, who had recently gotten stale on the OGC for reasons unknown). The idea was simple enough: "Hey guys, how about for the new logo, we have 'OGC', but we put them close together? It'd be kind of a streamlined look. Cool?" So that's what they did. Unfortunately for them (and great for all other members of the human race), the logo loses its simplicity when turned sideways. Cue up the porn music:
+ Lastly, we present the Emmy for Best Lead Actor in a Drama Series:
