Logopolis

Mike's Conversation with Roger Ebert about Coraline

Ebert: "The ideal audience for this film would be admirers of film art itself, assuming such people exist."

Unlike mothers with buttons for eyes and scary pink apartment houses, they do exist . Me.

[And] Selick creates an entirely original look and feel...

He sure does. The 3-D made it unlike anything I've ever seen. I hadn't seen a 3-D movie with the new process yet and was amazed by how "not bad" it was. 

[But] It's more or less impossible for me, anyway, to be scared by 3-D animation. The process always seems to be signaling, "I'm a process!""

Roger, I totally disagree.  This makes it sound like George Lucas over doing the CGI in the first two Star Wars prequels.  Selick uses the technology to tell the story, which is how it should be. I don't think 3-D should be used for all stories, but it definitely should have been used for Coraline.
 

 I think it's harder to get involved in a story when the process doesn't become invisible.

I also respectfully think this is bullshit. To me this is like saying movies in black and white can't be scary because real life is color. Or that movies with musical soundtracks can't be scary because we don't hear songs in the background. And can't we all agree that there's truth in the tales that lots of folks took fewer showers after Psycho? I didn't start making this argument based on this example but it sure fit nicely didn't it.

Credit is due to those who backed this film. I'm tired of wall-to-wall cuteness like Kung Fu Panda, and wonder if Selick's approach would be suited to films for grown-ups adapted from material like stories by August Derleth or Stephen King.

 I would love to see a horror movie directed by Selick. Even though the 3-D didn't take me out of the story, I wasn't scared of the movie.  But I was by the story itself. Adapted from the always awesome Neil Gaiman, the ideas behind it are the most nightmarish thing I can imagine.

(Okay, this conversation is obviously imagined and based on Ebert's review of the movie, which you should read because the excerpts I've used here make it seem like he didn't like it, and actually he did. I'm tired of using this convention, so I'm just going to finish my thoughts by myself.)

It's funny that I made a big deal on Twitter and Facebook last night about having breakfast for supper -- because that's one of the things Coraline's other family does in trying to ensnare her.  Maybe Andy's doing that to me.  Too late, I guess.

Coraline was suitably bratty and heroic in a way that lots of kids and parents will probably identify. Her relationship with her real parents -- believable -- was what made the rest of it so upsetting. Dakota Fanning continues her total and complete domination of roles that are age appropriate for her, but unlike other voice work she's done, it didn't sound like her... which means she's able to adapt her voice for specific characters...which just means she's still more talented than you.

And both mothers, but particularly the evil other mother is played perfectly by Teri Hatcher. Of course, a smothering button-for-eyes creature who kidnaps souls is only the second worst mother character Hatcher has played.  Susan Meyer is the worst mother in the world.  If Desperate Housewives were real life (a stretch I realize), we'd all realize there's a reason why Julie went far, far away for college, and if the show went on for many more years (or jumped into the future) we'd see that young M.J. will be warped beyond imagination. Just saying.

Way Too Lengthy Wednesday Night TV Report

Show I Didn't Exactly Watch
I woke up from my post-work, pre-dinner nap and caught  about 10 minutes of American Idol last night, and even though the cute guy who went first charmed me in his lame ass sweater set wearing ways, America, I think you should have voted for Adam because I am obsessed with rewarding his creative insanity (in which gayness only plays a very small part) after seeing clips of "Ring of Fire" last week.  Further, Mel said she "finally gets him" on Facebook last night, so it must be true.  For more amusing Idol recaps from somebody who actually watches the program -- read Ken Levine (for the short snarky Clif Notes version) or TWOP's Jacob (for the long, literate version that might take you longer than watching all two hours but is much better for you.)

Now onto shows I do watch while eating dinner or playing video games or with my full attention.; also known as "You're welcome, ABC."

Eating Dinner

Scrubs was funny. Even though I continue to wonder if we really needed another season, the more they focus on the new interns, the more entertained I am. Last week, they did a whole subplot about how nobody cares about J.D. and Elliot's romance and even though I think this was a metacommentary about the romance plot itself, I feel the same way about the characters.  Run. Their. Course.

Playing a Video Game
 

Likewise, I wasn't sure if TV needed another f'd up science corporation show (Fringe, The Terminator Not Starring Christian Bale, etc.) but making it a sitcom is inspired enough that if you have half an hour, you can spend it a lot worse than watching Better Off Ted (which is not a spinoff about the long suffering Scrubs lawyer as its title and timeslot might suggest...wait a second that would be awesome...why aren't I running TV?).  By the way,  Portia de Rossi is sorry her gay marriage ruined anyone's life.

Full Attention Required

Lost just keeps barreling along at such an enjoyable clip that even when the plot twists are really obvious, you don't have to wait a long time to see them play out.  

Spoilers from last night episodes ahead. You never made ME a sandwich, you little snot. You've been warned.

Like I twittered last night, a major difference between Lost this season and past: the whole Sayid choking the chicken (no, not like that, pervs) flashback¹  would have been spread throughout the a whole episode rather than wrapping it up with the teaser before the non-credits title... though honestly the story of Sayid, the warmest-hearted cold-blooded killer ever is pretty much the most compelling back story on the show. That's the thing -- the show may be predictable but that's only because we know the characters so well and they're so fleshed out... which is why moving the plot along so fast is so important.

For example, a week ago when Sayid found himself back in time face-to-face with evil-Ben-in-Harry-Potter's-body, we knew he'd face the Hitler dilemma...or as I like to call it the Genesis of the Daleks Conundrum. But we only had to wait 167 hours and 58 minutes to see Sayid make his decision and put a bullet into a pre-pubescent. 

And that's what makes it a good show rather than just an okay show; we didn't have to sit around watching Sayid say "Should I or shouldn't I?" Nobody used the Hitler analogy. "Do I have the right?" wasn't uttered. Been there, done that.

And best of all it wasn't the story of a heroic soul going back in time to make the "tough decision."  That's what makes Lost a great show rather than just a very good genre show.  It's like if the guy whose job it was to line people up at Auschwitz was the person sent back in time to kill Hitler as a baby.  By doing this atrocious act, Sayid may be condeming his soul.  But by changing time, it might stop Sayid from doing other atrocious acts and prevent other acts from happening.  So we're dealing with a situation where killing an unarmed four eyes kid who gets beat by his dad for making you a sandwich seems like the moral thing to do. This show is about so much more than a smoke monster.

¹ I can't remember but I don't know if Sayid ever had such an early flashback or if we'd been shown that his dad was such an asshole. But if we had, we shouldn't be surrpised.  We learned long ago that having daddy issues was a pre-req for getting on Oceanic Flight 815 in the first place.  A less observant Lost viewer might answer the question "Why is Hurley the comic relief?" with "Because he's the fat guy" when the correct answer is "Because his Cheech Marin-inspired daddy issues are tinged with comic relief."  Same answer to the question "Why is Jack so deadly serious and often boring?"  -- "Because his daddy issues are deadly serious and sometimes boring."  and "Why is Sawyer the sexiest guy on Oceanic Flight 815?" -- "Because his daddy issues are the sexiest."² 

²  But wait, you say, murdering your wife and killing yourself in front of your child isn't, forcing your son to turn into the kind of con man that caused your violent outburst isn't sexy, and while I'll agree with you, I will only do so if you're very narrowly defining the term "sexy."  If you define it by including sweaty gothic tales of the American South and noir stories like The Postman Always Rings Twice -- and I do -- then the tale of the James "Sawyer" Ford wins hands down.

Little Remixed Riding Hood

This is really really gorgeous and funny and lots of other words that simply mean "awesome."

Tomas Nilsson, a graphic design student from Linköping University, tells the story of Little Red Riding Hood with animated infographics. The video (below) was inspired by Röyksopp's Remind Me and has that ever so familiar European electronica music moving things along. Covering topics from grandma's nutritional value to the aerodynamics of the traveling bus, the video is very tongue in cheek and totally worth the three minutes of your life.

Watch it.

Slagsmålsklubben - Sponsored by destiny from Tomas Nilsson on Vimeo.

MMM, MMM, MMM, MMM

Tonight on How I Met Your Mother Barney referenced CanadianSexActs.Org... (dot org because it's a public site from the Ministry of Community Wellness and Public Service)

The site you are about to enter contains materials of sexually explicit nature and is intended for mature Canadians at least 18 years of age or older. (Or, 23 years of age in the Maritime Provinces.)
Anyway, the joke is all out and Alan Thicke heavy as the rest of the episode might be (I haven't watched the episode yet -- thanks American TiVo) but this joke alone made me pee my non-Candian pants:

Also, half of it is in French.  And like I said, Alan Thicke...and Crash Test Dummies jokes.

Beware the Quiet Girls...Once They Speak, They Have The Bitchiest Tongue

So, in what probably was not but certainly seems like an effort to extend her 15 minutes of fame, Kenley Collins of Project Runway fame and overdoing 50s pin-up look infamy (and also seeming like a total bitch and something about a tugboat captain father) threw some apples and a cat at her sleeping boyfriend.  Which is awful for the cat, but the boyfriend had to see something like this coming.  Somehow this involved the police and therefore the media (I wasn't really paying attention.)

This was all over the Internet yesterday and I didn't post about it (because I didn't really read it) and  all I had to say was "And I thought I couldn't have hated a person I didn't know more...and then she throws a cat."  And this wasn't exactly original.

But this morning Gawker went it made it more awesome...which is why they get the big money for their blogging and I can pay for my own hosting fees.

First, with this graphic... which I'd swear I'd totally designed in my head.  (But like sex with a porn star, I don't want to hear you bragging about it unless you've got graphic evidence, so it doesn't matter, so quit interrupting the movie.)

Secondly, with this tidbit, she threw HIS cat at him. Yes, there were two cats.  Hers and his. And she threw his.  Which somehow is just so much more bitchy.

Thirdly, and finally, and most wonderfully, this awesome quote from winner Leanne...which inspired this post's headline:

This should put a clear answer to the question I am most frequently asked, 'Was Kenley really that awful, or was she just edited like that?...I feel bad for the cat, the bruised apples and Zak. [her boyfriend]

The full quote is at Gawker, which, if you're interested you should go read (Since I've stolen most of their post, their graphic and part of a quote, I put the ellipses in and this plug, which is certainly the least I could do.)

The Dangers of Non-Targeted Internet Advertising

Example: I checked out this very page today and right under the popular post in which I make a joke about child molestation -- which is not really a joke about child molestation but instead a commentary about a sitcom trying to deal with a rather complicated and upsetting issue in a 30-minutes-minus-commerical-and-a-B-plot*  -- was an ad for Pedialyte.

That's not right and surely not what Abbott Labs intended. Like all media whores before me, I apologize to my advertisors.  But, like most media whores before me, that apology is one of those rather half-assed ones: "I'm sorry if I offended people for something that isn't entirely my  my fault this time."

Speaking of stupid celebrity apologies AND me making money, the Mexican grocery store next door still has plenty of Michael Phelps Corn Flakes boxes for sale and I've been told (and read) that opportunists are selling them on eBay.  I checked it out last night and somebody was even trying to sell an empty box.  Seriously.  I'm totally considering in investing in ten boxes of Corn Flakes to sell on eBay -- and in this market, I think you could make the argument that it's a pretty sound investment.

* Seriously, the aforementioned episode of Mr. Belvedere didn't even have the good sense to make the "Wesley gets a bad touch at camp" the only plot.  While Wesley was being helped out of his swim trunks at camp, Mr. Belvedere and Bob Uecker** were yukking it up as failed golf buddies back home.  No, seriosuly.

** I met Bob Uecker once. It was awesome.

Attention American Dad Fans -- Here's What "Mr. Belvedere" means as a verb

In last night's episode of American Dad, Roger said that if you Google "Mr. Belvedered in my pants" you'd figure out what he meant.  But as of this morning, if you Google it, you only get pages about Mr. Belvedere.

I'm here to tell you that Mr. Belvedere in your pants DOES NOT mean you went #1 or #2 as the context might suggest. 

In fact, it means that you spontaneously ejaculated in your pants because you were touched inappropriately by a camp counselor like young Master Wesley in the most upsetting "very special episode" I ever saw of any sitcom EVER.  (For those non-children of the 80s or those who might have had something better to do with their Friday nights at the time, I'm not making this up; click here to read about the episode with the ominous sounding title "The Counselor.")

You might ask what gives me the right to make this definition decision.  Well, when the writers of American Dad tells viewers to Google something and don't bother to populate the Internet with their own definition, it's now mine to use to drive up traffic and spread mis(information).

Also, the girl who played the robot Vicki on Small Wonder grew up to be Pink.

---

If you came here looking for an explanation to this joke, please click an ad that you're interested in below or to your right to support my site. Thanks.

A Couple of Thoughts on Breast Feeding and the Death of Print Media

Kent Brockman on The Simpsons tonight^*:

A solar eclipse is like a woman breast feeding in a restaurant. It's free it's beautiful but under no circumstances should you l look at it.

But seriously, Hannah Rosin wrote a great article I enjoyed today -- a very, very lazy Sunday which is why I'm still awake now -- about breast feeding and how and why moms have become fascist about doing it. As far as topics which probably couldn't impact my less, breast feeding is probably in the Top 10; however, reading well-written, thought-provoking articles that really don't have anything to do with you are what Sundays are for. The Sunday New York Times used meet this purpose, allowing me to read articles about places I'll never go, plays I'll never see, topics that will never impact my life, and politicians I'll never vote for in places I'll never go. Today, I did it with my iPhone,  proving something we all knew:

I'm part of the newspaper business problem, not the solution.

And back to breasts but not for their baby-nourishing purpose, I had another thought this morning about jugs/melons/boobs/tits that is more Logopolis-like and perhaps I'll get to later this week.  What a tease! It involves Ann Jillian and was provoked by watching this:

YouTube is also an awesome thing for Sunday brunch for your brain, but it can mean that songs like this will be stuck in your head all day. But anyone who's young and healthy knows that that's the way the traffic flows

* Tied for perhaps the best line of the night with as the nun said to Lisa who went under cover to find Maggie when Homer accidentally left her at the convent's doorstep, regardomg abandoned babies:

Next week's nine months after the prom. We'll be up the rafters in them.

Tonight's Daily Show

It says a lot about our news culture that real journalism makes my skin crawl and seeing a person who deserves it like Jim Cramer get it makes me so uncomfortable that I almost feel bad for him.  Almost.

Jon Stewart, as much as he was uncomfortable, could probably do this every night. But he doesn't want it. It's not what he signed on for.

So here's the lesson, folks, and it's more than just "don't fuck with Jon Stewart:

If you're a shit heel, don't go on your multi-network platform whining about how the funny man on the cable show with a 1.1 share is picking on you.  Because you can bitch and moan and kvetch on any network you want, but if you don't actually have an argument beyond that, he might just hand you your ass AND get ratings gold from it. 

Delicious Fueds from Today

and comments I've made on other places on the Internet today.

Main Bout 1: Dan Savage vs. Ross Douthat

Undercard: Me vs. porn (not really)

 

"Porn is Bad." I, of course, don't agree with this; it's the title of a post by Dan Savage. He, of course, doesn't believe that either.

It's just that Savage has a feud with Ross Douthat re: porn, and now that Douthat has been named as the NYT conservative columnist, he decided to bring it up. I'm not sure why, perhaps because he thinks one bad stupid argument means you shouldn't get a column in a paper, but I really don't think Savage wants to go there. God knows, I disagree with Douthat 99% of the time, but I'd rather see an intelligent conservative step up than somebody from the Palin wing of the party. And even on an issue dear to my heart -- porn -- I'll cut him some slack.

I wrote:

Like it or not, agree or not, many folks in the world treat looking at porn while you're in a relationship as, if not a deal-breaker, a definite no-no. But nobody asks why or even talks about it. Straight men hide it from their wives and gay men hide it from each other. * Sure, if you were to say to any of them who ban it from their homes -- either vocally or by assumption -- that porn = adultery, they'd laugh and say "of course not." But by bringing up the point and discussing it intelligently in the light of day rather than in the shadows, it forces couples to examine the question and question their assumptions. And forcing somebody to explain why beating off to porn is equivalent to them screwing somebody else either shows the weakness of the argument or the weakness of the relationship (or at least the character of the person involved.) So it's win-win.

* All I know about lesbian porn is that my lesbian friends never think there's any good enough for them to waste their time on.

---

Main Bout 2: Jon Stewart vs. Jim Cramer

 
Undercard: me vs. Time's TV Critic (again not really)

Feudalism

James Poniewozik, Time's TV critic (doesn't really) attack Jon Stewart, I defend Stewart from the thing he (didn't) say, and then it turns out we agreed all along if I'd just bothered to read all of his posts rather than just be one of those idiots who posts on the Internet before he reads.

But anyway, parts of what I said is worth repeating, even if it shouldn't be directed at Poniewozik (whose name is impossible to spell)

While I'll agree that Stewart has also milked this feud, leading with it all three days this week and having Cramer on tonight, and he has addressed the personal attacks made against him -- by basically agreeing with them that yes, he is a comedian (I was never quite sure what point Joe Scarborough was making, Stewart and The Daily Show have also made the point every night that CNBC hurts America for most of the reasons you list. In other words, he's used the attention from these fueds to answer the personal arguments and make sociatal ones. Meanwhile, Cramer has never quite responded to the fact that CNBC and the media in general by focusing on the markets as the sole indicator and boldly presenting "In Cramer We Trust" as a potential network slogan has reduced something very complicated into something of a game and presented the decline of the stock market s a failure of the system rather than something that is guaranteed to happen in the free market system they claim to be fighting to protect from Obama.

---

Bout 3: The Iraqi Shoe-Thrower vs. The System

 
Undercard: Me vs. the Bush Administration (this time, I mean it)

Iraqi shoe-thrower sentenced to three years in jail

Continuing to fuck things up even after he's not in office, W. has just created yet another martyr for the Iraqi people. This is the perfect opportunity to teach a lesson on freedom of speech/expression to a part of the world we're supposedly trying to spread our values too. Unfortunately, it IS an example of spreading our values -- just the worst ones. While I'm not saying that he shouldn't be punished, Bush could have asked for leniency.I don't see throwing shoes as an act of violence on the same level as attempted assassination, and no honest person would either. I think timed served (six months) would more than fit the crime. Intent is important here, certainly as important as considering who the target was -- which is obviously being done in the situation. Knowing what we know about what throwing shoes means, this is obviously a political statement, and surely we want to encourage the types made with flying footwear rather than flying shrapnel, particularly in this region.