Adventures in Twitter Land: Jason Statham is the most awesome person in the world

Someone posted a link to this on twitter. It invovles two wonderful things. Patton Oswalt and Jason Statham

Statham's imdb.com profile, collectively, is a promise to you, the weary filmgoer. It's a promise that says, "I promise that you will not FOR ONE SECOND be bored during one of my movies. You won't learn shit about the human condition, or feel a collective connection with the brotherhood of man. But if you give me $10, I will fuck an explosion while a Slayer song plays".

Please read on.

Dog Attacks: An Evolutionary Test

Apparently this weekend my Uncle was walking his dog. In the course of the walk he was attacked by another dog. The dog took out part of Uncle's lip and Uncle had to have plastic surgery.

Which once again raises my eternal question: WHO THE FUCK LOSES A FIGHT TO A DOG?

I've covered this twice before. And I'm NOT FUCKING WRONG! So, let's go over this again. In fact, let me fucking break it down for you.

HUMAN BEINGS HAVE TOOLS, SHITHEAD!
Human Beings are able to dominate other biological creatures as a result of the Human Being's ability to use tools. Dogs do not have tools. Dogs have neither guns nor knives nor collapsible battons nor pepper spray. Maybe you don't carry a gun. Fine. Maybe you don't have a collapsible batton. Stupid, but ok. Pepper spray is perceived to be for women so, ok, maybe guys don't carry pepper spray. But a knife? That's fucking evolutionary development #1 for humankind!! First we learned how to make sharp shit. Then we learned how to burn shit. If you, a human being, still fail to grasp your place in the entirety of existence and so fail to carry something sharp? I'm sorry. You've fucking failed.

Human beings have tools. Dogs do not have tools. SO USE YOUR FUCKING TOOLS, SHITHEAD!

HUMAN BEINGS HAVE HIGH-FUNCTIONING MOTOR SKILLS, SHITHEAD!
This one has two parts

Part 1: Dogs hurt you with their teeth.
If we had a diagram of a dog the part with the little "Danger!" sign would be the snout. That's it. A dog won't wag you to death. A dog won't paw you to death. A dog's going to fucking bite you; this is what a dog does. So, really, if you're attacked by a dog? You have maybe 6 inches, in a really fucking big dog, which you have to avoid. How the fuck hard is it to avoid six inches?

Moreover? That six inches is merely bone. We're not talking about fighting wolverine. All you have to do is either avoid the dog's jaw or crush the dog's jaw. How the fuck hard can it be to avoid a dog's jaw or, let's say in the worst case scenario, break a dog's jaw? You know what? Breaking isn't even a sensible strategy. Just fucking punch the damn thing in the nose. You, a human being, have high-funtioning motor skills. You can identify "nose". So all you have to do is punch the fucking nose. This is not a difficult task to perform.

Part 2: Your skeleton > dog's skeleton.
Human beings have far greater mobility when it comes to grappling than dogs. Your spine bends in a manner which allows you to bend over backwards. A dog's spine cannot bend that way. When you stand on two legs you are in a fighting position. When a dog stands on two legs it exposes its supple underbelly. If you cannot prevent the previously mentioned six inches from interracting with your face via a combination of your ability to kick and the dog's ability to have a soft underbelly? You fail.

DOGS ARE FUCKING STUPID, SHITHEAD!
Here is a video which describes the manner in which dogs attack. Note how a dog attacks:
1) Dog lunges for you.
2) Dog bites you.
3) Dog shakes head while maintaining a grip upon your person.

Dogs have innate traits which dictate the manner of attack. Since you, a human being, are fucking convinced that you have free will your actions are not dictacted. You, a human being, with a fucking brain, can modify your actions to compliment the situation. So here is a test.

Situation: Dog lunges at you. Do you
a) step aside and so avoid the lunge
b) apply force to the nose of the lunging dog
c) apply force to the exposed underbelly of a dog
d) cut the dog's throat
e) shoot the dog
f) stand there like a fuckhead

The correct answer is: ANYTHING BUT F, ASSHOLE!

Here's the point. Were I incorrect? Human beings would have died out to dogs long ago. If it were impossible to win a fight with a dog then dogs would have killed off human beings long ago. But you know what? Human beings dominated the evolutionary contest between humans and dogs. Humans have tools. Humans have high-functioning motor skills. Dogs are fucking stupid.

If you lose a fight to a dog? You're not just a pussy. You're not just a dipshit. You have failed at being a human being. If you lose a fight to a dog you have failed to employ tools. You have failed to utilize your high-functioning motor skills. You have failed to exploit the stupidity of dogs. You have failed on an evolutionary level.

You lost a fight to this:


Human Beings did not get to this point losing fights to dogs. So, I'm sorry, shithead. But if you lose a fight to a dog you're out of the species. I hear that the kittens are recruiting. Maybe you could be a kitten. They lose to dogs too.

The Failure of Spirit and Cult Film

I wrote the following in response to a this post on io9.com.

I think the failure of The Spirit proves the rule that cult success never strikes twice. This film, for all intent and purpose, is a sequel to Sin City not 300. Sin City did not make a lot of money, but it has developed a cult following.

In the realm of cult film making there are two things that can happen when you make a follow up the a cult hit 1) it either becomes mainstream straight ahead hollywood movie or 2) it fails.

An example of the first outcome. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre was made for about 150,000$ outside of the hollywood system. It became a huge successes and grossed 30 million. With returns like that a sequel had to happen. 10 years later The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 was released. It make double what it cost to produce. It was far more gory, much like the slasher horror films that were popular during the 1980s.

example 2: Rocky Horror Picture show slowly became a cult film in the years after it was released but the 1981 follow up Shock Treatment has been largely forgotten. Rocky Horror did not gain a cult following right away. It took a number of years for the midnight movie culture of the film to spread across the country.

7 years after Rock Horror came out, and well after it became established as a cult film Shock Treatment was released first as a midnight movie. Only after it had opened in niche theaters did it have a general ride release. They were trying to capture the already existing cult market for the film, without acknowledging what made it cult in the first place.

Getting back to The Spirit, Miller seems to be going back to the same creative well that he and Robert Rodriguez used before. Miller didnt' do it any better, or bring anything new this time. Lots of sequel rehash successful films. However cult audiences do not seem to be as forgiving. Cult film goers, like other fandoms, go above and beyond the norm. That is what makes them fans. They are not interested in seeing rehashes and remakes.

The Spirt was doomed to failure from the start.

Clean Coal [chat]

This week we watch as the coal industry tries to explain how coal is clean.

Mark Souder: Intelligent Design, Purpose, Fall

I personally believe that there is no issue more important to our society than intelligent design. I believe that if there wasn't a purpose in designing you - regardless of who you view the designer as being - then, from my perspective, you can't be fallen from that design. If you can't be fallen from that design, there's no point to evangelism.
As an evangelical Christian, I believe the premise of a fall being at the core of reforming lives. I believe the concept of grace and forgiveness comes from having fallen from something.

- Mark Souder


Part 1: "Purpose"
"I believe that if there wasn't a purpose in designing you - regardless of who you view the designer as being - then, from my perspective, you can't be fallen from that design."
Translation:
If there was not a purpose in designing X then X cannot be fallen from that design.

Let's say I design a coffee pot. By Mark Souder's logic there cannot be a fallen coffee pot from that design unless there was purpose in designing the coffee pot. This raises the question of what a "fallen coffee pot" would be.


Part 2: "Fallen"
"I believe the premise of a fall being at the core of reforming lives. I believe the concept of grace and forgiveness comes from having fallen from something."

"Fallen" is a concept derived from a notion of having fallen from something. One might infer that fallen denotes a "higher" state of being from which one might have fallen. So, presumably, there was a "higher" state from which the coffee pot "fell". But what the fuck does this mean?


Part 3: What the fuck is wrong with Mark Souder?

If there was not a purpose in designing X then X cannot be fallen from that design.

To "fall" one must fail to meet some expectation. The problem, I think, is that Mark Souder confuses "purpose" and "design". A "fallen" state may exist with regard to both "purpose" and "design". With regard to a coffee pot there is both a "design" and a "purpose"; "design" and "purpose" are two separate and distinct things.

Mark Souder is fundamentally incorrect. X may certainly "fall" from a design, fail to meet a design, regardless of the "purpose" for X. "Design" and "purpose" are not interchangeable terms. Purpose and Design are seperate and distinct. "Design" regards a manner of formulation, a structure, an organization. "Purpose" is "intent". One may design with regard to an intended purpose (purpose as "holding coffee"), but the purpose for which a coffee pot is made is sepereate and distinct from the design (the physical structure and formulation) of a particular coffee pot.

So, "if there was not a purpose in designing X then X cannot be fallen from that design" is nonsense.

And Mark Souder can go fuck himself with a shit-encrusted crucifix which has previously been used to bash the skulls of third-trimester fetuses.

American Teen: Fuck Jake Tusing

There is a rule which states that Mikey is always wrong about everything, ever. The corollary to this rule is that, usually, Mikey is correct. So when Mikey said that American Teen was a shitty, anger inducing movie I expected American teen to be an awesome movie. Unfortunately, due to the corollary to the rule, American Teen was not awesome.

The primary question to ask after watching this movie is what THE FUCK is wrong with that Tusing kid? The pimple-faced nerdy guy has three attractive women thrown at him (not to mention the lap dances in Mexico) and he fucks up the relationship every god damned time! Nerdy Freshman girl? He ignores her. Nerdy hot girl at semi-formal? He refuses to dance with her. Busty girl he has flown in to the prom? Who the fuck knows how he screwed that up. Yet inevitably the nerdy sympathetic character becomes the least sympathetic of the lot.

Tusing acts as a microcosm of the problem with American Teen: THESE PEOPLE ARE ALL CONTRIVED FUCKS! The Tusing kid loses women because he ignores them. The hot popular girl creates her own problems. The insane outsider girl's problems all only ever exist in her own head. And the popular male jock? He was the only sympathetic character as a result of his dad (go, basketball, go) being the cause of all his problems. All of the conflict in the movie occurs as a result of horrible people doing horrible things. Usually? To their selves.

The entire narrative of American Teen drips of narcissism and unbelieveability caked in a tapestry of unconcerned self-loathing and self-love. These characters (they truly cease to be human beings after the first ten minutes) simply waft about doing horrible things to one another without any provocation.

What the fuck happened to Erica, the girl who sent out the topless picture of herself in the first act? Everyone in the school shares her topless picture and then the movie continues on without resolution? When outsider girl was dumped at the beginning she couldn't go to school for weeks. Then when popular jock dumps her in a text she continues on as if nothing happened? And is it just me or is Ally one of satan's evil temptress minions cloaked in giggles and cleavage whose primary fixation is upon manipulating the lives of those around her as she attempts to steal the spotlight?

American Teen was a horrible movie whose primary failure is its own source material. It bypasses an exploration of the trials of adolescence by fixating on the particular pitfalls of the lives of its simply malevolent characters. These are not good people. These are not interesting people. Rather than providing an interesting narrative concerning adolescence American Teen provides the audience with an hour and a half long train wreck propelled by the perpetual doltish ineptitude of its shithead cast.

Go Tigers

-J- Explains WoW

If anyone for Blizzard is reading this, please give this man a Job