I have been unable to shut up on my Tumblr. I know, I know, there is a “Ranting” category here, but when I rant on my workblog, I like it to be a large, well-written rant with an actual point or two, and Tumblr allows for something more spur-of-the-moment, unedited, angry (none of which are very positive adjectives, come to think of it).
So I’ll compile my rants and other smaller, quicker pieces of text here, since I initially started Tumblr to point to things I like, not to publish original work. And since I’m doing the latter now, I should post it here as well — since it’s my workblog and all. So, the first batch:
“!!!” (4 days ago)
I hate exclamation marks.
Imagine the above sentence ending with an exclamation mark and you’ll see why. It sounds like one of those whiny kids you’ll usually find in places that are supposed to be silent, especifically built in a way to shut out the outside world and give you some silence to read, or relax or whatever and suddenly comes this brat who has decided it is the PERFECT place to pretend he’s Indiana Jones running from a tribe of spearmen —
— sorry, I digress. Back to exclamation marks. Their addition on the end of most sentences will make you sound like a retard and take out the comedic value of any quote, even if it is used to emphasize irony. Italic is a much better way of doing that. The one true use for exclamation marks is, well, an exclamation. And even so I don’t like to rely solely on it — I like to use italic, bold or even all-caps in order to avoid, completely, that goddamn whining tone.
It’s one of the main reasons I hate advertising, aside from the main one that it’s trying to sell you bullshit as if it’s something revolutionary and so much better than all the other similar bullshit from different companies. They try to do that with exclamation marks. Not just that, they are authoritarian too, the pricks. “Buy this!”, “Consume that!”, “Drink this!”. It always sounds like the cheeriest motherfucker in the planet is saying that to you, and all you want — well, all I want — is to punch him until his nose is protruding from the back of his head. Perhaps a cuff across the ear would be enough for you, dunno. Pussy.
Not to mention the few times someone comes up with an actually decent joke to sell their product with — they stick an exclamation mark in the end of it and it’s like the joke is being told by that cousin of yours who constantly interrupts himself with his own premature laughter.
I think I’m done now. In my defense, I just woke up.
“Diet, Phase Two” (3 days ago)
Have you ever noticed the effect your bedroom has on your mood? It varies from person to person, but to me, a messy bedroom is an unsettling reflection of my own psyche (which is all kinds of fucked up). I like to keep it neat, but not TOO neat — neat enough that I can still quickly switch between writing, practicing piano, playing some games, watching a film or going to sleep, all of that without dodging piles of dirty clothes scattered all over the carpet.
The same can be said of my body. I used to weigh 225 lbs. My face was practically a circle and I had horrible concentrations of fat on my abs, butt and thighs. After I started an incredibly radical (but sufficiently healthy) diet, I lost weight until I reached 185, at which point I could no longer stand the constant hunger and resumed my normal food habits (which have never been good).
But the effect it had on my mood was fantastic. Suddenly I could do pull-ups, wear tighter clothes, photograph my face from more than one deceptive angle. It was a completely different life, being thinner. But after a year (and the addition of only six pounds, fortunately), the novelty wore off and I could see the remaining imperfections clearly, because let’s face it — 193 lbs (my current weight) is nowhere near good to a guy who measures 5’11”.
My face is no longer a circle, but it’s oval — and I always wanted a gaunt face. If I loosen my abs, a belly is clearly visible, and my thighs still wobble unflatteringly when I move.
And let’s drop the bedroom metaphor for a second and talk honestly: I also happen to love women and would like to look attractive for them.
“Oh”, someone says. “But women don’t care about looks, they care about personality and —” I interrupt the person with my uproarious laughter and escort them out of Cuckoo Land for my next paragraph.
BULLSHIT. While they certainly care about personality way more than men do (stick your boobs in our face and whether you kill kittens or not mostly ceases to be our concern), it’s obvious the way you look is a factor. And even if it wasn’t, I see it as terribly unfair — attractive women work their asses off to stay attractive and meanwhile all I need to do is make them laugh once or twice, expose one or two deep thoughts and suddenly I’m worth your attention?
Personality is vital, but good looks also matter. Women have a right to lust for well-toned male abs as much as we lust for round female butts.
So now I’m starting phase two of my diet, which will destroy the remaining physical problems I perceive on myself and whatever’s left, I will work out into inexistence. Should take a month or two, since the diet goes like this:
Only one meal a day: a soup full of whatever’s necessary to keep me alive. And for the rest of the day, fruit, whenever I feel like it. Next day, repeat. And so on.
I went from 225 lbs to 185 in two months doing that, and at the end of it I was still perfectly sane (well, as sane as I get). Except that at that point I would get an erection every time I saw a pizza.
And now that I just started the second phase of this diet, everyone will starting talking happily about food I CAN’T FUCKING EAT in three, two, one…
“Movie Critics’ Gems” (yesterday)
One thing I enjoy doing is bashing little capsule reviews on RottenTomatoes that, regardless of the quality (or lack of it) of the movie in question, manage to be stupid all by themselves.
“Public Enemies”, one of the movies I have been expecting the most this year, has been getting mixed reviews that either say it’s groundbreaking in its approach or simply a mix of good scenes and bad scenes.
And while some capsule reviews manage to say a lot and be funny at the same time, like Gina Carbone’s “Never mind crime, I’m declaring the nation’s first war on hand-held cameras”, some really astound me in mediocrity.
Tim Evans: “Classy for sure. Sharply paced too. But while Public Enemies gives Bonnie And Clyde a run for their money, The Godfather has nothing to fear.”
I could give a fuck if it beats “The Godfather”, I do not expect every gangster movie to have that ambition. Is it good? Is it not? Or are you actually resenting this film because it is inferior to “The Godfather”?
Sunday Mail: “The hottest gangster movie in ages.”
WHY? Or do you expect me to take your fucking word for it?
Mike Ward: “The cat and mouse game played by the world’s most prolific bank robber and the first big-time FBI agent isn’t worth a slice of government cheese.”
More worried about making stupid metaphors about rodents than simply saying why he dislikes the film…
David Edelstein: “The best rejoinder to Public Enemies is Michael Jackson’s Smooth Criminal video… It’s a tommy-gun gangster fantasia with a touch of Guys and Dolls, and it’s everything Public Enemies isn’t.”
Right, so what the movie is lacking is Johnny Depp and Christian Bale starting to dance?
Gary Wolcott: “America in the throes of a depression idolized them as heroes. They robbed hated banks. Some think today’s bank robbers actually run them but that’s commentary for another day.”
Apparently commenting on the fucking MOVIE also was left to another day.
Kam Williams: “Depp does Dillinger in grisly gangster saga.”
No shit, Kam! Thanks for summarizing the synopsis for us.
Christian Toto: “Public Enemies is exactly what summer audiences deserve – a smart, sophisticated action movie. So why does it feel like a letdown?”
Er, yeah, why. It’s your job to try and figure that out. And if you think I’m interpreting that as a hook to read the full review, think again.
Cammila Albertson: “For people who loved Heat, this is a tour de force.”
Much easier to compare it to a previous film rather than speaking about the actual film.
Nick Rogers: “It’s no “Heat.” For skirting the lawman’s story, call it “Warmth.” Still, it bulks up, with Midwestern muscle, from a violent version of “The Aviator” into Mann’s “Gangs of New York” – unwieldy and imperfect, but compelling, exciting and thoughtful.”
I cannot tell if Nick thinks “Gangs of New York” is by Michael Mann or if he thinks “Public Enemies” is Mann’s version of “Gangs of New York” or if Nick was high when he wrote this. “Warmth”, Jesus Christ…
Colin Covert: “It fits neatly on the shelf with Bonnie and Clyde and The Godfather.”
Again using other movies to (not) talk about the one in question.
Jules Brenner: “The popular reaction to what the defiant anti-hero came to represent in depression-era America made it almost criminal to call him one.”
Are you paid to review a movie or write for Wikipedia?
Brian Tallerico: “Audience members who find themselves on the same wavelength as Mann and his screenwriters will find enough to talk about to keep them raving about Public Enemies for days.”
“On the same wavelength” sounds like one hell of a prerequisite to enjoy a movie.
Fiore Mastracci: “This film shows the difference between classes of criminals; the difference between gangster and gangsta.”
And that means WHAT regarding the quality of the film, exactly? Did I miss a memo?
Steven Rea: “Ultimately, the movie’s a bust.”
It’s a capsule review, Steven, not a capsule adjective.
Stephen Whitty: “What’s the reason to make this movie, now?”
Oh, I dunno, for you to watch it and wonder what the reason is?
Peter Travers: “It’s movie dynamite.”
Nick Schager: “Public Enemies fizzles at the moment of detonation.”
Jolene Mendez: “As much as the film had bang for the buck, it just did not cut it.”
Susan Granger: “Awesome, action-packed and enthralling…”
Three adjectives that could describe a million other films, no review.
I have a lot of fun doing this, as you can certainly tell. Now, lunch.
That’s it for the first batch. I’ll try to keep it regular but a little more compact, since this might be too many words to take in on a single blow.