Hollywood hits the toilets

Remake after remake after remake. Well, well, well. It looks like Hollywood will have to find real writers. I stopped seeing many movies years ago, some other people including family are quite disenchanted with vomit films (films that make you want to vomit). Let's face it! I am not interested in doling out $7.50 (Indiana gets off cheap) for a piece of crud.
The last movies in the theater I saw were, well ... weak to bad.

Fantastic Four -- clumsy as it was stupid
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire -- pulling out the pictures, forgetting the words. If I saw it only as a movie, perhaps it wasn't too terrible. As far as a story relevant to Harry Potter, it was awful.
--- brainstew --- I don't go to the theater often, so another movie -- I can't remember.

In a previous post I mentioned Peter Jackson and his love for Greatest Story Ever Told epics. I mention this movie because it is 6 some hours long. The Lord of the Rings, while adapted from an in depth collection of works was, well ... long, boring. Here, the director for Harry Potter should have stepped in and cut out the New Zealand tourism parts ... mountains, very lovely. Oh wow! Bogs! Enchanting. Hey, look! Isn't that the ocean (surrounded by the ocean), no. It's digital. You mean with all of the helicopter footage, you don't have a single scene with real ocean? What kind of travel video is this?

Knowing the general stupidity of people, I would expect visitors, seeing the dedicated village (Shire) set in New Zealand are upset to find out that there are no leprechauns in New Zealand, nor Hobbits, nor Elves, nor Trolls, nor Orcs, nor Wizards nor castles. What a let down!

BTW: anyone who has read the books &/or seen the movies could sense the awkward relationship of Sam and Frodo. They had mountains ... could have been a prequel to Brokebackside Mt. No. I think that the madness of Tolkein didn't go down that path. I use madness in that anyone who wrote volumes equaling the library of congress had to be a bitty nutty.

Getting a number from the net

I bought my verizon wireless phone on the net 13 months ago. The error was that people within my hometown had to dial the area code for a long distance number. I never understood. I only wish I had addressed it quickly. Apparently when you type in a zip code, that is immaterial to the logic of number selection. It chose one within the area code, but nowhere near my zip code. Nice.

I called a verizon wireless place in town. They gave me the info number to make the change -- my only solution. The rep helped me changed the number. What a waste.

That reminds me of punching in numbers for a credit card or something else only to have a person ask you the same [insert colorful metaphors here] numbers! We're still not on the same page with customer interfacing. The system gets the number and does nothing with it ... ho hum ... yes. That's very nice ... please hold.

"What's your number and name", a voice prompts you.

How Ang Lee came up with the idea

"Hey, Soo! I must have slept on a cactus last night, my butt really hurts!"
"Yeah, yeah, yeah ... mine too Aug (snicker)."

"Gee, Aug. Could you use a good back rub after such a long day?"

"Nothing says old wild west like 'Kansas City Faggots*'".

Rawhide, backside ... what's the difference?

Did you read the story? Uh, yeah ... after reading Ann Rice's flaming gay vampire epics.

It's just something about the branding, the roping, the donkey-punching, the spurs, smell of leather, whipping, and horse stalls.

Why am I writing this insulting crap? I don't like that the commercials they air still don't plainly say ... "GAY MOVIE!" Don't omit the truth, don't lie about it. If you get harranged for it, then you asked for it.

"Group Sales" -- ha!
Focus Pictures -- out of focus.

* courtesy of Blazing Saddles, a great movie.

Cartoon madness

Perhaps I'm overgeneralizing, but I think if you don't like something, you talk about it or use other methods. Sadly, I was slow at typing this, but doesn't it seem that many people react with violence rather than banter or chiding?
Granted, depicting any religous icon in demeaning ways will bring hostility, but I don't think violence is necessary -- just an excuse to be violent. I would liken a cartoon much like graffitti. Is it really that terrible and unwashable. Granted, like anything else, there are costs and penalties, but killing people not responsible? I don't see the corelation.
Perhaps MR was right about a select few being able to take a joke and not start swinging.

I think about the L.A. riots where a bad verdict was the "justification" for mass looting, murder, arson, rape, assault and other crimes. Huh? You stole to protest something in which you had nothing vested? I don't see the connection there. The people who steal, destroy and slay do so, and would do so without a reason. It is merely a cover to commit wrongs and crimes.

As for Finland. I would suggest that it was like Clinton lying about having sex. The right answer is, "yes". Their right answer before or directly after the publication should have been, "Oh, man! We are so very sorry. The people responsible have been sacked." Once there was murder, to apologize to murderers -- uh, no. Don't say sorry now.