Miserable Retail Slave
The Cure For The Case of Common Boredom
Blogs
LMFAO's "Sexy And I Know It"= New GLBT Anthem?
|
|
comments (1)
|
by Josh
I’ll admit something here. At my current place of work, one of my supervisors feels the need to play 102.5 WIOG on the radio constantly. Given that she’s a year younger than me and she’s into the whole young, party, free spirit, I guess that’s something I can expect. And naturally, every song on that station gets repeated several times a day. If I have to listen to Katy Perry sing about The One That Got Away again, I will seriously find her and give her a piece of my mind.
And then, like a backlash of fake tan and Jersey Shore quotations, I heard this song:
At first, I didn’t even think this was by LMFAO. Then again, I’m not exactly up on pop culture, especially given that pop music is there to sell records first, make music second. I also missed my chances on seeing who these guys were last semester, when they visited CMU during Homecoming Week (I think). I mean, who do those guys think they are? Sexy and I know it? I know for sure that I’m not sexy, and given my relationship status, it’s probably not gonna change anytime soon.
But then I realized something. Maybe this song is aiming for some other kind of message.
Maybe this one’s for the gay community.
Check this out:
1.) Consider the lyric “I got a passion in my pants and I ain’t afraid to show it”.
The song’s already established that there’s girls checking this guy out. Maybe he’s well dressed, and we already know he “works out”. However, he’s got this…passion. I assume it’s a bulge in his pants, if not a rock hard boner. Girls would like that, I guess, but we already know girls are eyeing him up. So why mention this? Simply put, there’s more than just girls at this club. There’s guys, too…and they might be noticing his passion as well.
2.) Consider the lyrics “When I walk in the spot (yeah), this is what I see (ok)
Everybody stops and they staring at me”
Dig deep into your childhood. Like, really deep. Preschool or Kindergarten deep. Before all of you read your porno magazines and your Cosmos, there was a children’s book called “Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See?” The featured lyric above this paragraph is said in almost the exact manner as the title of this children’s book – in recorded readings of said book.
Weighing in with Wikipedia, a bear is “a LGBT slang term that refers to members of a subculture in the homosexual and bisexual male communities and to an emerging subset of LGBT communities with events, codes, and a culture-specific identity”.
3.) Consider the lyrics “And when I'm at the beach, I'm in a Speedo trying to tan my cheeks (what)”
It’s been my experience that while men find a lot in women to love physically, this kind of admiration is not reciprocated. At the risk of being too graphic, the only thing men really have besides the obvious is…well, what’s behind the obvious. Once the clothes are off, money and social status doesn’t really matter, which is a huge handicap to play with in games of attraction.
But the lights are off during sex. And even if they aren’t a woman isn’t going to be fantasizing about a male body part she can’t even see or use. So this begs the question: what’s the point of tanning your cheeks? Who’s really gonna see them when clothes come off? Certainly not girls.
And last, but not least….
4.) Do the wiggle.
Yeah.
Eat your heart out, Lady Gaga. Born this way? More like I’m sexy and I know it.
-Josh
Online Dating Alert
|
|
comments (2)
|
by Josh
I bring before you readers my contribution to the world, to my fellow man, and to MRS. Hours of painstaking research on various online dating websites have been spent on my behalf, and where I found pain, you male readers will find gain.
I’d like to believe that there’s readers out there that are socially inept, or just don’t like the idea of going to a club to meet girls. Some of you might have resorted to dating profiles. Well, this is your lucky day. And yours. And yes, especially yours.
This is going to be an ongoing mini-series based on my observations and experiences: in other words, some of you guys may be out there, surfing cyberspace for some kind of connection for the opposite sex. Some of you guys may not know what you’re looking for, some know exactly what you’re looking for. Some just don’t know how to interpret signs that things may be destined to fail, or just don’t care. If I still have you, here’s the first of however many more of these I feel like dropping on an unsuspecting world.
Ladies, if you see this and take offense to anything, please take it all with a grain of salt. I admit bias in some areas, but some of this is to be taken with some humor in mind. Perhaps, if you’re guilty of these things I list, maybe it might provide an extra perspective upon signing in again, eh? Or maybe I’m an asshole. Flip a coin.
So, in the face of impossible demands and standards, ladies and gentlemen, I give you Online Dating Alert.
-Josh
----------------
Online Dating Alert 1: Common Taglines -by Josh
The first in my attempts to save unlucky punks lies in…THE TAGLINES..
Often, a tagline is the first “in” one has for prospective viewers, almost as important as the picture. Messages and profiles will be viewed second. While there might not be a whole lot that can be done about your face, there’s a brilliant opportunity to showcase some wit. Unfortunately, other people use this area as a place to show their flaws. Luckily for you, information can be gleamed even from this little blurb of a profile.
Upon surfing random profiles of girls within a 100 mile radius, I find these kinds of taglines in order to “entice” a would-be date to read their profile:
1. “Looking for a REAL man”, or some variant
Okay, I’ll give them this one. This is cyberspace, and there’s no way that anyone can truly know that whoever one’s talking to is a real human being and not a serial killer or rapist. But upon further investigation, this isn’t the case. Early 00s saw a spike in internet predators, and we saw Chris Hansen and others pursue sex predators, and watched stories like Megan Meier invade CNN like a new fad.
But wait! This isn’t what they’re talking about at all. These women are referring to “REAL men” as “the inverse of boy”. In other words, every woman placing this as a tagline believes that most of these people online are boys.
What kind of bullshit is that? These people are placing an ultimatum on arguably 80% of every guy on here. What is a man, really? Someone who doesn’t make mistakes? Someone who’s already learned what they have to learn in order to make his partner happy? Emotional maturity? What is it?
I realize I’m being rhetorical, but what is a man?
2. “Redneck Romeo” or some variant
Let’s see what we have here. “Romeo”; that’s a name from a Shakespearean character. I think those of us who are on this website are familiar with Romeo and Juliet. Most American women would see Romeo as an extremely romantic character; he does anything and everything he can for the sake of the love of his life, Juliet. Hell, Taylor Swift sung a song based loosely on this kind of thing.
“Redneck”, on the other hand, is a term used in a derogatory way to describe rural people who might not have access to education or wealth. Lately, songs from artists like Gretchen Wilson (“Redneck Woman”
and programs like “Blue Collar Comedy Tour” have forced Americans to see redneck as a legitimate subculture, and as such, broke it into mainstream. Today, redneck can mean anything within the confines of items and slogans, like “Country Boy Cadillac” and “Git-R-Dun”.
and programs like “Blue Collar Comedy Tour” have forced Americans to see redneck as a legitimate subculture, and as such, broke it into mainstream. Today, redneck can mean anything within the confines of items and slogans, like “Country Boy Cadillac” and “Git-R-Dun”.The fusing of icons creates a massive contradiction. For example, Romeo came from immense privilege, and as the next in line to lead the Montague family, he could have it all. Rednecks have nothing, or at least, that’s what’s implied in the confines of the stereotype. A dependency on material things for identity versus Romeo’s rejection of everything to have the one thing he can’t have…how can this work?
The only connection I can make is that “Redneck Romeos” are poor and obsessive, which can lead to only one thing…divorce and alimony checks.
3. “Someone Worth My Time”, or other variants
I know what they’re trying to say here. I really do. No one wants to waste their time on these things, and it’s really embarrassing to fail hard in the opening conversations and subsequent dates. I know it, I’ve been there.
However, this kind of tagline just makes the female in question sound extremely pompous. Is anyone really worth any kind of time on cyberspace? A certain time investment is almost an unwritten rule when it comes to both talking on cyberspace and finally meeting the date in question. Who can really judge whether or not anyone is truly the Mr. Right/Ms. Right that they seem to be on the internet? A lack of will to invest time in anything simplifies the game of cyberlove into pick-and-choose, which is not the point at all.
4. “Someone Who Loves Me For Me”, or some variant
While a softer, more innocent declaration of desire probably shouldn’t be attacked, I think it bears examining.
“Loves Me For Me” is a condition that I think love should feature unconditionally. If two people of any sexual orientation or domestic arrangement are together, some kind of heartfelt connection exists already..
Revisiting the Romeo thing, these people are asking for someone to fall in love with them almost immediately based on pictures and profile poses. This is an extreme demand on any guy that may come across the profile, as no connection has been reached yet. In fact, communication likely hasn’t started yet.
This is a place that a guy should exercise extreme caution: someone who might want unconditional love in such a brash manner may have glaring flaws in their character that might’ve been dealbreakers for any number of potential dates preceding you. It could be as minute as a counting habit to something, like, say, overt discussion about rape and murder.
However, the person in question is demanding ubiquitous acceptance. You be the judge; I won’t say every case is the same. But it kind of makes you think when you see that tagline and read a profile filled with OCD-like demands in a man.
!!!!! - PROTIP: using the word “rape” in any context is never a good choice on cyberspace, even in jokes. - !!!!!
In closing, stay safe when reading up on those headlines. First impressions are very important, and if you’re unsure about what to write about yourself, simply BE yourself! Don’t cloy, and don’t be cliché; a catchy tagline might be the in you need to meet someone.
In Online Dating Alert 2, I’m hoping to tackle something either really cool or really embarrassing: photos! Also expect a bit of a math equation to arise…
-Josh
Why Remake '3 Ninjas'? Well, Why Not?
|
|
comments (0)
|
by Josh
As a kid, one of the first movie franchises outside of the Disney Empire that I remember watching religiously as a kid was the 3 Ninjas saga. For those of you who don’t know about the original film, “3 Ninjas” was released during a time where America was taken by a literal ninja storm of Japanese influence (Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles), and Saban and 4Kids Entertainment followed suit (VR Troopers, Superhuman Samurai Cyber Squad, Big Bad Beetleborgs, etc). To this day we Americans have been unable to escape the tried-and-true Asian invasion (Samurai Jack, Ninja Warrior, Shaolin Showdown, Ninja-tagline ad nauseam).
For the record of Hollywood greed, this engine was not immune to sequels either, and 3 Ninjas had three (Kick Back, Knuckle Up, and High Noon at Mega Mountain).
Of course as a kid I would think this was the most awesome stuff to watch. Kids my age were kicking ass, and as one as naïve as a child, I was immune to the type of humor that the adult in me would find ham-fisted and cheesy.
In addition, the old, wise Oriental sage stereotype is in full force. Victor Wong had to have realized at some point that he was being used as the old Asian master guy that many actors from Southeast Asia/Japan seem to be utilized for. Jackie Chan always seems to find himself in stunt roles. Chun-Yow Fat expressed discontentment for always playing the sage-like monk, and regretted the typecast that “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” placed for him on an international level. Pat Norita will forever be remembered first for his roles in “The Karate Kid” and “Happy Days” second.
However, for all its flaws…given that everything is being remade now, if I were to see a movie franchise revitalized, I’d see this one, and here’s why:
1. While others might try and place ninja kids as far into 2011 as possible and beyond (much like how the Karate Kid re-make allowed Jaden Smith to do a crazy backflip-kick instead of Danny LaRusso’s crane stance for the final point), I’d argue that using everyday items as weapons was what gave the original 3 Ninjas film appeal in the first place. Also, the plot was simple, but deep enough for growth. For example, seeing Snyder as a more developed villain as well as featuring more facets of his dojo/network would’ve made him much more fearsome. Would it take away from the “family-movie” status it had? Yes, but if Nickelodeon can play The Fifth Element uncut, we can have our dark ninja movie.
2. The plot for “3 Ninjas: Knuckle Up” was amazing. The three brothers were placed in a situation with both racial and environmental elements: the land needed to be saved from a toxic waste baron, and the dumping itself threatened the land of a Native American tribe to the point of death. Some kind of underdog, grassroots movement masquerading as a ninja movie put this sequel well ahead of its time, and featuring noted actors like Jack Napier, Vincent Schiavelli, as well as the original kids from the first movie. If Disney has taught us anything, it’s that badasses like The Rock and Vin Diesel can be brought to their knees with “family-friendly” comedy. But again, why not inject some of their worlds into the G-rated mix, and watch it boil?
Then again, maybe the plot was slightly old; Captain Planet had long since came and went. You be the judge.
3. An untapped cinema market in the realm of re-makes is making movies darker than they were before (with the exception of Christopher Nolan’s “Batman” franchise). To this day I debate myself endlessly over who was a better Joker: Jack Nicholson or Heath Ledger. Injecting the real-life, hard-copy stuff of the late 80s/early 90s with the modern desensitization of the present, and a little CGI, and this film has potential.
4. Chuck Norris was an American ninja, of sorts. Yes, I’m aware he was a martial artist, but a good number of people I know like to blend karate with ninjas, in their minds. To say that fanboys would watch this revamped movie in droves could be an understatement. Hell, give Mr. Norris a role like Hulk Hogan got in High Noon.
If you survived all my fanboyism, here’s the point I’m trying to make:
Let’s remove the camp from family films of old. Or better yet, revitalize some interesting ideas and make them darker. It would seem that remakes are the wave of the future (the only original movie of recent years I can think of is Scott Pilgrim; NOTHING was original about Avatar), so if we’re gonna do them, let’s make them better so that we’re not complaining about the fact that Hollywood is remaking films AND making them suck.
-Josh
Top 5 Reasons Why "Robin Hood" Is a Great Movie For Kids
|
|
comments (1)
|
by Josh
Disney’s “Robin Hood” is responsible for two things.. One being a fueling of the furry subculture, which I cannot forgive. Something about a man bigger than I am decked out in a ten thousand dollar fursuit scares me wholly.
The other? Straight up gangsta violence, and that’s pretty awesome.
Much like how Bambi brought death straight to your house as an innocent five-year old on VHS, “Robin Hood” threatened to jack your memories up with images of how to go all Tony Montana in your posh little suburbia – and effectively, too. I provide five points of evidence for your viewing pleasure:
5. Gather Your Merry Men and Kick Some Ass
While kids aren’t gonna be familiar with the Robin Hood legend completely, adults will know that Prince John stole the throne from King Richard as he was away on the Crusades. As we all know, the Crusades were a Christian revolution to drive all non-Christians out of England and other English-controlled areas of the world. Disney tried playing it off like Sir Hiss hypnotized King Richard into doing this, but honestly, would a lion-hearted king really fall prey to such a parlor trick? But I digress.
And Robin Hood himself follows a similar method in the cartoon film. Upon his success as a bandit, he finds allies in Little John, Friar Tuck, and other animals/citizens in Nottingham, and they all hang out in Sherwood Forest.. SPOILER ALERT: Robin Hood succeeds in freeing Nottingham for King Richard, but with a little help from his friends. Anyone with even a hint of charisma (or the latest Bieber CD nowadays) can pull this off effortlessly. This, of course, leads to other things as you get older, like turf wars, cliques, neighborhood formations, hair-trigger militias, etc,…
4. Mind-Rape
Speaking of Sir Hiss…
While hypnotism might be a disputable topic to some, the effectiveness of coercion isn’t. Sir Hiss is effectively the main catalyst for all the drama in this entire movie, from the Crusades to calming Prince John down when he’s on a tirade about his Mommy. Without him, King Richard wouldn’t have left Nottingham.
At some point, someone might add Freudian reads into Prince John’s obsession over his Mom; Oedipus complexes need not be mentioned. Wait, too late. But I wonder how many people started trying to adopt odd habits like sucking thumbs and trying to learn hypnotism at a young age. Imagine the hijinks in your first grade class! If that doesn’t work…well, bullying still exists in schools. However, cameras and such have increased law enforcement to the point where even 10 year olds can have restraining orders placed on them! Revisiting the charisma factor to keep Merry Men around, you’ll need more for eloquently placing demands and failures to comply.
3. Viva La Revolution
While this might be an overlap of #5, the concepts behind it are reversed.
Robin Hood is a counter-revolutionary, and in the film, aims to restore order for King Richard and reverse the tyranny of Prince John blah blah blah. The main point here is that Robin Hood effectively initiates an underdog battle against the domineering Prince John, who’s holding all the cards. And what American doesn’t love that story? If Sylvester Stallone can do it, then surely an English legend can reiterate an “American” identity of ours, right?
Rewind to your first grade year. I don’t know about you, but every day in elementary school we had to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Our teacher was like a god in the classroom; his/her word was law, and there was nothing we could do about it. Or was there? If enough kids complained and stalled the lesson plans, the teacher’s power was effectively destroyed. I can only remember one instance in my school days when a substitute teacher fought fire with fire and sent every kid that disrupted her to the principal’s office. Our class was cut from 32 kids to 10 that day.
But when the teacher crumbled under the weight of a few dozen snot-nosed brats…if there was one that could orchestrate such a movement on command, imagine how this kid could grow up. T.J. Dettweiler from Recess comes to mind; no one messes with this kid. Even Principal Prickley has an understanding with this 4th grade kid. Today, the school systems blame the teachers for everything that goes wrong with the little bastards, so…for those of you who are reading this and are going into education, know that you have my utmost respect for putting yourself out there against those cretins.
2. Money Makes the World Go Round
I can still hear Prince John’s line from the recesses of 1995: “Taxes, ah-ha! BEAUTIFUL…LOVELY…TAXES!”
If kids from my generation on up have been taught anything during birthdays, holidays, graduations, and eventually paychecks, it’s that money is vital for status. Gifts and material goods are one thing, but money is a symbol of freedom – something kids don’t have a lot of when they’re young. Not that they’re wholly aware of this, but when they’re told that “yes, they CAN buy that super secret awesome chocolate fudge covered super toy”, the possibilities are endless.
Now I’m left wondering how many young children of today stumble on their parents arguing and worrying about bills and finance. I’m certain it happens all the time. And I’m also equally certain that kids are much smarter and craftier than we give them credit for. While I’ll spare the “parents should watch their words” speech (because we all know that hiding things from kids is useless), I wonder if this has any connection to, say, lunch room deals? Selling toys/video games? At my elementary school, we had a “school stuff store”, where pencils and such were sold to kids during recess. Gotta get the money somehow…and how do we get the money?
Well, kids, ask Robin Hood. (cue clip of Mr. Hood stealing money from Prince John).
1. Kill It With Fire
The climactic scene where Robin Hood fights a psychotic Prince John is amped to 11 (again, from a child’s perspective) as the entire fight takes place in a burning castle.
When I was a young child, it wasn’t long before I watched the Robin Hood movie, and from there, Beavis and Butthead. Anyone who’s familiar with the Mike Judge film knows that Beavis is somewhat of a pyromaniac: “FIRE!!!!!” In this case, the promise of planting seed of pyromania and destruction at such a young age is as horrific as it is seductive. Action-packed fights in a burning castle? Swords? Shooting arrows at a presumably-deceased anthropomorphic fox? Thank you, Disney, for taking away our innocence while you claim to hand it to us in a neat movie bundle.
- Josh
One Of These Things is Not Like the Other: David Bowie vs. Lady Gaga
|
|
comments (7)
|
by Josh
Recently, an old friend of mine and I had a discussion regarding Lady Gaga. She, being one who is a member of the more…alternative styles of living, loves her completely. “Born This Way” is her anthem, and Gaga’s lifestyle, in her eyes, seems to be rivaled only by more recent women who act as they will, a la Bjork.
In our conversation, however, she told me that Lady Gaga is this generation’s David Bowie. And I guess this whole tilted article is my response to THE WORLD.
As you may know, David Bowie is a rock legend. He’s been around since the late 60s, found success in “Space Oddity”, and never looked back. He’s also had many alter egos/rock personas, like Ziggy Stardust, Halloween Jack, The Thin White Duke, and all of them have been sexually and musically ambiguous. Lady Gaga is also sexually ambiguous, and likes to play dress-up with eggs and meat. She’s been shattering records left and right with speed of sale, as well as finding a special niche in the alternative crowds.
One of these things is not like the other.
Both of these artists, at their peak, depended solely on the nature of glam rock in order to spread word of mouth. The major difference here is that Mr. Bowie was a pioneer. He rose during an age of rock where The Beatles were beginning to crumble, and the dominant forces at work were The Rolling Stones, disco, and eventually other soulful renditions of rock n’ roll. Bowie jumped head-first into the sexpot and brought taboo out as a weapon. He created a cult of both devout listeners and personality with each new rendition of himself. In addition, he detached himself from each persona; Bowie was separate from Ziggy was separate from Duke from Jack. Like a metamorphosing butterfly that kept on gaining new bodies and wings, Bowie continually refreshed pop AND rock as we know it today. Not only that, but when Bowie came out as bisexual in 1972 to the public, he later made remarks throughout his career that this declaration was a mistake, largely due to the fact that it took away from his music in a sense and that he was a singer/songwriter before he placed himself in a sexual identity.
Today, Lady Gaga is completely dependent on her allegedly bisexuality in order to sell records. When one listens to her music, you can’t deny that it’s targeting a specific audience. It’s funny, because Gaga claimed in an interview to be the “least judgmental person on Earth”. I would argue that it works only one way. Today, the popular thing isn’t veganism, emo or anything from the previous decade. The popular thing is to be sexually ambiguous. When she arrived on the popularity track, which was as sudden as it was all-encompassing, she already brought a cult following in Haus of Gaga, already made statements for the GLTB community, and slammed it down our throats with catchy beats. As opposed to Bowie letting the tree grow, Gaga brought a tree from her backyard and threw it in the middle of the street. Sounds like a challenge to people who are content with tradition.
I would argue that art of any nature is all about subtlety. Bowie is still critically acclaimed for his ambiguous undertones because he didn’t make any all-encompassing statements about the nature of his work. He just went onstage, got into his personas and characters, and let the final product speak for itself. Lady Gaga, however, postures with her egg palanquins and bubble dresses, all the while making declarative statements about her work and herself. “I've got so many gay fans and they're so loyal to me and they really lifted me up. They'll always stand by me and I'll always stand by them.” “The fact that I'm into women, they're all intimidated by it. It makes them uncomfortable. They're like, 'I don't need to have a threesome. I'm happy with just you.” All of these quotes are from interviews of her. She’s laughing all the way to the bank. But I digress.
And besides, do you think anyone’s going to look back at “Born This Way” and go, “Wow! What a song! This changed my life and defined an era!” Hell no; “Fame”, “Space Oddity”, “China Girl”, “Golden Years”, “Little Wonder”, my personal favorite “As The World Falls Down”, and oh so much more stand the test of time with no accusations of plagiarism from Madonna or Christina Aguilera. And let’s not forget that it was Bowie, not Nirvana, who originally wrote and performed “The Man Who Sold the World”. He has roughly as much dominance on today’s radiowaves as The Beatles, The Stones, Steve Miller Band, Creed, Phil Collins...and what does Lady Gaga have? Bad romance? Poker faces? You don’t hear Poker Face anymore. And one could argue that she simply hasn’t been around as long as Mr. Bowie, but that’s fine. She won’t be around for much longer anyway; another crazy pop icon will dethrone her, and the rest of the world will not miss her. Besides, pop already has their court filled: Michael Jackson, Madonna, Britney Spears, and of course, David Bowie himself.
tl;dr Bowie just goes out there and does it, Lady Gaga is an attention whore, blah blah blah.
Thanks for reading.
~Josh
Linkin Park's Creation of Proto-Emo
|
|
comments (0)
|
by Josh
If I can make sweeping stereotypes based on two country songs, surely I can do it to nu-metal/emo, right? Riiiiiight? (insert trollface here). And maybe I’m kicking a dead horse with this article, but hindsight is always 20/20. Maybe. But let’s begin.
When I was in 6th grade, Linkin Park’s debut album “Hybrid Theory” was released. Or was it 5th? I don’t know. Either way, it was a standout memory of childhood, because not only were these guys taking the airwaves by storm with “One Step Closer” and “Crawling”, I was the first kid in my class to get this CD. Many begged to borrow it. None held it but me. A good portion of my time as a kid was spent alone, and as such, I had a lot of time to myself to listen to music and play video games. Sometimes both at the same time. Linkin Park was nothing like what I heard up to that point, and I was given the New Millenium treatment in heavy doses (Creed, N’Sync, Disturbed, etc), and was still stuck on the biggest band of my early childhood years, The Steve Miller Band. But Linkin Park’s sound had a completeness that, even now, I find overwhelming to my earholes. Phil Spector’s “Wall of Sound” term is all I can think of that fits. So when “Meteora” came out near the tail end of my 8th grade year (and my final year at Zilwaukee), I was first in line for that shit, and I viewed it as Hybrid Theory 2.0 (ironically, “Reanimation” was released between both albums).
I go through fits of nostalgia at times as an adult, and sometimes it’s uncontrollable. One thing I’ve been doing to cope is bust out their first two official studio albums, “Hybrid Theory” and “Meteora”. To start, these albums are nothing short of amazing. According to Wikipedia, “Hybrid Theory” was certified Diamond in 2005 (yes I cheated on statistics…sue me), and Meteora arguably holds a more personal impact to me.
So now enters the question. Did these guys invent the emo subculture?
My opinion is that Linkin Park is, arguably, proto-emo. Their sound was nothing like the mainstream heard yet at the time, and all one has to do is listen to the lyrics. “Hybrid Theory” and “Meteora” all have to deal with what I interpret as issues that are:
A. Real issues that real people deal with every day, and try to work through.
B. Imagined issues that kids going through puberty finally have a voice for.
My personal belief is that, if one listens to a certain brand of music for an extended amount of time ad nauseam, eventually their mind becomes attuned to that kind of mindset. Assuming that’s true, this kind of musical practice is risky. Paul McCartney admitted in an interview regarding The Beatles that a great portion of their songs are imagination-driven (oh really, Paul? How about the entire Rubber Soul album? Or the first four American releases?). So the listener could be listening to issues that don’t really exist for the artist. Nothing short of asking Mike Shinoda or Chester Bennington would yield any good results; it’s all speculative for the Average Joe. But let’s assume that a lot of the music was fueled by epic rhetorical skills and nothing else. Put this together with the personal belief thing and…well, let’s examine some lyrics.
Graffiti decorations
Under a sky of dust
A constant wave of tension
On top of broken trust
The lessons that you taught me
I learn were never true
Now I find myself in question
(They point the finger at me again)
Guilty by association
(You point the finger at me again)
I wanna run away
Never say goodbye
I wanna know the truth
Instead of wondering why
I wanna know the answers
No more lies
I wanna shut the door
And open up my mind
Or how about…
I remember what they taught to me
Remember condescending talk of who I ought to be
Remember listening to all of that and this again
So I pretended up a person who was fittin’ in
And now you think this person really is me and I’m
(Trying to bend the truth)
But the more I push the more I'm pulling away 'cause I'm
(Lying my way from you)
No no turning back now
(I wanna be pushed aside so let me go)
No no turning back now
(Let me take back my life I’d rather be all alone)
No turning back now
(Anywhere on my own cause I can see)
No no turning back now
(The very worst part of you)
(The very worst part of you is ME)
My sophomore year of high school, I distinctly remember a motivational speaker named Reggie Dabbs coming to talk with students about every day life. He had a little skit where people acted out periods of frustration at home and at school, to the music of “Numb”, off the “Meteora” album. The circle was complete, and all doubt vanished: Linkin Park became the catalyst for other bands to try and emulate the teen heartstring style (Hawthorne Heights and My Chemical Romance come to mind).
And am I driving this from personal experience? You bet I am. I was there. I eventually wore the black. I cut. I cried and danced in the dark alone. And I survived. All that remained was a much wiser me and a ton of kick-ass music. But the thoughts had to originate from somewhere; and I blame Linkin Park for injecting these kind of thoughts. But, to quote Noah Wyle’s character in the cult classic “Donnie Darko”…”Did you ever think that maybe babies need darkness?” Duality is a powerful teaching tool, after all.
Nearly a decade after “Hybrid Theory” was released, I still believe it is one of the greatest albums of the New Millenium. And then “Minutes to Midnight” was released, and the Linkin Park I grew up with and loved died.
• = side note: my favorite Linkin Park song by far…if I had to pick one.
~ Josh
Country Girls/Guys - And Why I'm Running in the Opposite Direction
|
|
comments (4)
|
Country Girls/Guys – And Why I’m Running in the Opposite Direction
by Josh
Every one of us (more or less) have faced some kind of heartbreak in our lives. Even us here at MRS; I’d like to think me and my brethren (Paulie, RFP, can I get a witness?) have become seasoned vets as far as getting burned. And as a single guy myself, I’m constantly weighing options in the game of love like Gerry Kasparov or Bobby Fischer when it comes to making moves. Who do I talk to, where do I go, how do I present myself?
Most girls I talk to, however, imply that it takes a certain type of impulse in order to succeed.
And by now you might be wondering how this article fits in the MRS world; this is a blog about movies and shows and music, not your own drama!
In that case, let me introduce you to my little friends Carrie Underwood and Jaron & The Long Road To Love.
We get two glimpses of how “real Americans” and “real country people” handle heartbreak in contemporary America with these songs:
Artist: Carrie Underwood
Song: Before He Cheats
Carrie Underwood: If I knew someone personally who was dating Ms. Underwood, I’d tell him to get the hell out of there before she talks with her friends about gossip. This woman will straight-up wreck your vehicle, slash holes in the tires (as opposed to stabbing or puncturing), carve her name in the seats, smash the glass fixtures…for the sake of argument, and because of the fame this woman boasts, let’s use her as the case study for girls.
…I imagine Underwood to be watching Mad Max 3 and getting inspiration from Tina Turner in a post-apocalyptic world as the men are drinking beer and playing bathroom polo in the roadhouse nearby.
Artist: Jaron & the Long Road to Love
Song: Pray For You
Jaron: This guy is actually pretty passive-aggressive with his angst. At first glance, he’s a regular Christian man who hasn’t been to church since God knows when (see what I did there?), and instead of doing something drastic, he’s praying to God. But he’s pretty ballsy with his statements: he’s actually asking God to commit to a series of “unfortunate” incidents to his ex in an attempt to make him feel better. While I assume that he feels better about this decision, I’d wager that he’s playing with death on this. Summoning God to smite one girl that jilted you or hurt you? I’d say that this is a representative for a case study of the boys.
So we have vandalism versus karma.
Let me underline all this by saying that I in no way think these songs are good, or for that matter, comedic. Nothing is funny about someone’s tire blowing out at 110mph or vandalizing an expensive vehicle (what is it with these people and vehicles…?). But it kinda makes you think before you decide to hit the rural areas for the ladies/men. I think that, depending on what gets vandalized, felonies are brought into consideration. Not to mention SHE CARVED HER NAME IN THE SEAT. No lawyer in the world would take that case, especially after a song is written about it. Also, trying to use the Lord for bad can backfire pretty harshly (if you indeed believe in God, all you skeptics out there).
As for me, after listening to country radio for the first time in literally years and hearing these songs, I think I’ll space it out another 7-8-odd years before I tune in again. I’ll certainly avoid the bars for awhile, too. If “real Americans” are listening to this garbage and internalizing these messages, I’m probably gonna wake up to a ransacked house if I don’t return a phone call.
~Josh
McDonald's Hiring Day
|
|
comments (0)
|
by Josh
McDonald’s Hiring Day
So I’m sitting in a McDonald’s as I type this. Ironic?
On one of the windows is a poster, featured here:
What conclusions can I get from this?:
1. The McDs Gestapo isn’t content with dominating the fast food business, now its setting its sights on creating holidays. I wonder how many more restaurants will follow suit?
2. Both sides of the poster feature a black woman and (if I recall) a Hispanic man. I don’t think I need to elaborate more on what could be perceived racial implications.
3. While school gets out early May-June, the date for “National Hiring Day” is April 19th, a Tuesday. Kids win over adults in McDonalds jobs primarily because adults or those with at least a Bachelor’s Degree are too “overqualified”.
Is anyone else smelling a rat?
-Josh
One of These Things is Not like the Other: Michael Cera vs. Jesse Eisenberg
|
|
comments (2)
|
by Josh
All rise for the judge.
I remember watching an episode of Family Guy, where Ricky Martin is finishing a concert and goes backstage. After a couple seconds of applying makeup and a skirt (?), he resumes the stage as Jewel. Lately, I’m noticing that history doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme. The same holds true in actors, but I’m noticing that repetition is selling movie tickets and merchandise.
I’m not sure if it’s just my age or the fact that I’m riding on euphoria in getting in this blog with my Scott Pilgrim obsession, but I’m following it up with a movie that seems to have defined a growing number of college students lives (especially if you’re a member of the Disney Internship program, according to my brother.)
Actually, never mind that. I almost went into a review of Adventureland.
I don’t know about you, but I feel like Jesse Eisenberg has been challenging Michael Cera as the nerdy, awkward white boy that finds himself in extraordinary situations. Let’s run down the list:
Michael Cera had Superbad, Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist (which is threatening to enter my Top 10 Worst Movie list), Juno, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (insert gushing smile here), and the TV series Arrested Development, to name a few of his works. Plus, he’s Canadian (I’m part Canadian myself, you see).
Jesse Eisenberg had Get Real, Adventureland, Zombieland, The Social Network, and I hear Zombieland 2 is in the works.
One of these things is not like the other.
How are they similar? According to Wikipedia, they both started a presence in cinema in 1999, presumably when they were kids. They also tend to play THE SAME ROLE in every major movie they have done. Again, revisiting the nerd issue: scrawny guys in meaty situations. Both Cera and Eisenberg get the hot mess of a girl in nearly every high-budget movie they’re in. Parties are always involved. Perhaps these two are the new idols teenagers can look up to.
Or are they? An argument I hear all the time in my house is that the “liberals” that wanna “turn this country into Russia” are old enough to solidify power in our federal government. Ignoring the Glenn Beck statements, there’s a very valid point here. Maybe us video game dreamers are old enough to make movies with such characters and find an audience.
But differences? Oh, the differences.
Eisenberg’s acting style seems to be much more grounded that Cera. Cera has gained a reputation for being a tad bit whimsical in his characters, and a little too…I hate to say intellectual, but he plays characters that seem high on themselves all the time due to obscure knowledge and indie cred. Think of Scott Pilgrim, where he kind of acts like an asshole to Ramona during the 4th Evil Ex section of the movie. Think of Juno, where he remains pretty far under the radar while Juno’s belly grows. Nick and Norah is a cesspool of indie bands and city knowledge.
Plus, Eisenberg has the distinction of working with Woody Harrelson, one of my favorite actors of all time. This wins points in my mind. He also seems to take a more grounded approach to his characters. I liken it to this concept: while Michael Cera is floating around the room, Jesse is stalking the grounds. Overcast versus intensity. Earth versus Air.
I must admit that I have not watched The Social Network yet, which gives Eisenberg less room for flops. But we’ll see what happens over the next few years, I suppose. I expected Cera to fade out after Superbad as a one-hit wonder, and here he is slaying Evil Exes and such. Eisenberg doesn’t have any bad movies because he has barely been in any yet.
What’s your opinion?
Now ponder this, because I’m going to hide from the academic police for using Wikipedia as a source AND not citing it. See? I’m a rebel after all. If this becomes a fun topic, I may consider doing a comparison of two people that I’m positive have the same parent, Zooey
Deschanel and Katy Perry.
Fingers crossed!
-Josh
DIg This? Then you might dig this related material...
A Closer Look At Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
|
|
comments (5)
|
by Josh
Here's a note about a topic I hold very close to my heart.
It's in regards to the movie that has completely caught my attention, and if you follow my Facebook, it needs no introduction.
That's right. A painstakingly long note on my review of Scott Pilgrim vs. The World.
I'd like to add that this wouldn't be possible if not for Paulie Walnuts. His combating my own starstruck initial perceptions of the movie forced me to take the film for what it is and look at it differently.
First off, the plot is simple, but original (to a degree). Scott Pilgrim meets his (literal) dream girl, Ramona Flowers. The two hit it off, but in order for them to date, he must defeat all seven of her Evil Exes. The film in itself is the big screen adaptation of the graphic novel series Scott Pilgrim. Having read all six novels, I rented the DVD with some guy friends and tried to keep my inner critic out of the room for a couple hours.
I'm going to cover my review in seven sections, mostly gravitated around each Evil Ex:
1.) From the very beginning of the movie, a lot of promises are made to the audience. We know that a fusion of video game, comic book, and conventional movie is attempted here, and the visuals are amazing. The fight with the first Evil Ex, Matthew Patel, gets us primed for more and I'm ready.
2.) Comparing book to movie, the differences here aren't noteworthy regarding the fight with Lucas Lee. However, at about this point in the books, a bit of backstory is revealed regarding Scott and Kim Pine. I felt that this was needed; instead, Kim comes off as kind of a broken-hearted girl creeping on Scott from the shadows. Her character is much deeper than that. The one-liners and the quirkiness of the characters let me forgive this, however.
3.) Story stays pretty accurate here in the fight against Todd Ingram. Vegan psychic, Envy, Scott almost dying...all here. An interesting change is that Scott doesn't get his extra life here: that happens against the Twins much later. We also don't see how Todd cheats on Envy; this side-plot was important for developing Envy as first a source of heartache for Scott, and later, a refuge for when he is dumped by Ramona. Also, there is a battle where Knives and Ramona fight against Envy, and almost lose.
The bass battle is pretty cool, though.
4.) This is where the movie loses momentum at an alarming rate. In the books, Scott and Ramona move in together and Scott gets a job with Stephen. We see none of this, and we don't see Scott try to pick himself up out of his slacker life. Instead, we're treated to an immediate fight after Todd with Roxie. I wanted to cringe when she screamed that she was a little "BI-FURIOUS!!!!!" not because of its cliche, but for how they portrayed her character. I swear I've met the real-life version of Roxie at every college campus I've visited...
Anyway, lots of details get melded here. The party was supposed to be for the Katanyagi Twins. The back-of-knee weak spot was a weakness of Envy's, not Roxie's. And Mr. Chau, Knives' father, isn't even in the script (a Ninja Gaiden-style battle takes place with Scott/Ramona vs. Roxie/Mr. Chau). Lots of holes are getting riddled in the script due to negligence...and Scott gets his Power of Love Sword here, not against Gideon.
5 and 6.) This is the Evil Ex fight that I had the most problems with. The Katanyagi Twins are straight badasses in the book. They have robots that fight their battles, and they actually speak and go into depth as to how Ramona hurt the both of them. Instead, we're introduced to Gideon before the Twins "fight" Scott (the movie fight is a battle of the bands with the Twins vs. Sex Bob-omb), and the Twins fall in, like, 3 minutes.
7.) I was in love with the scenes with Gideon and hated them at the same time. I loved the action, and loved the swordplay. I hated the fight with Ramona and Knives, and equally hated Scott/Knives vs. Gideon. This was a total creative betrayal of the relationship this movie sought to establish with Scott and Ramona. Also, not much explanation is given as to how Gideon is this powerful or how he got the chip on Ramona; in the novels, she had this chip on her all along.
What details were missed that this movie needed?:
-Stephen turning gay/working at the Happy Avocado, an area where Scott works...character development.
-Scott's wilderness sabbatical with Kim Pine, where he fights and merges with Nega-Scott.
-Ramona isn't even involved in the final fight between Scott and Gideon; she herself is in the woods at her father's cabin while all this happens.
-Backstory discussing Kim, Stephen, Wallace, and Envy.
-Gideon dates Envy near the end of the movie, not Ramona.
Having said all this...this movie was definitely for the fans or the mildly curious. I legitimately love this movie anyway, because it reaches out to a side of myself I wish I could achieve. Nerdy guys, isn't it one of the most epic things we can do, to fight for the dream girl on our terms? Scott Pilgrim gets this. How about music skills? Bass guitar. Video game styled combat and sound effects? Hell yeah.
But the real message I got from this movie is this: she's out there. You can love if you be yourself. That's a damn good message.
The delivery definitely was a creative answer I've been seeking forever in at least one movie, and the people from my generation will love this.
Also, comparing levels of badassery, here's where I'd rank the Evil Exes as far as legitimate danger (with 7 being the highest):
1. Matthew Patel: Despite this guy being a total pansy, he actually was probably the most believable Evil Ex (besides Lucas Lee). Plus, he's the first one we see in the trailers. "MISTER PILGRIM!!!!!1111!one!!!1!1!"
2. Roxie Richter: I kind of felt like the bisexual stereotype was played too heavily in the movie for her. Nevertheless, both Scott and Ramona team up to defeat her. Weak.
3. Katanyagi Twin: See below.
4. Katanyagi Twin: If only their robot skills were used in the movie...but they weren't, and a creative outlet was totally missed here.
5. Lucas Lee: Action star, stunt team...
6. Todd Ingram: psychic powers? He could've torn Scott in half with his MIND. He blew a hole in the moon, for crying out loud. But instead he flings Scott and throws him through a few walls.
7. Gideon Graves: He's the archvillain for a reason. I actually liked Jason Schwartzman's portrayal of Gideon; I felt it was pretty accurate.
On a nerd scale, I give this movie a 10/10.
On a critical scale, I give it a 6.5 out of 10.
....that averages out to a B grade. And that's not bad.
I'm getting the DVD soon. After I watch it a million times, I'm gonna get to work finding my own Ramona Flowers.
-Josh
Categories
Google +1 Button
Twitter Follow Button
Recent Blog Entries
by Miserable Retail Slave | 0 comments
by Miserable Retail Slave | 1 comment
by Miserable Retail Slave | 0 comments
by Miserable Retail Slave | 0 comments
