the nazi prince, lost's garden and the fossil record

england's prince harry went as a nazi to a costume party and everybody's outraged. the simon wiesenthal center urged him to visit auschwitz, tony blair's office tried to stay out of it even as a spokesman said "clearly and error was made" and harry already apologized, saying it was a poor choice of costume

now, had he dressed up as the devil himself, would anyone have complained? or would all the little english girls already in love with him be clamoring for photos of the devilish bad boy?

dressing up in a costume does not mean one supports whatever that costume may be. you dress as spider-man, that doesn't mean you were bitten by a radioactive spider. you dress as a vampire, that doesn't mean you drink blood or support the drinking of blood. you dress as a witch, it doesn't mean you cast spells. you dress as a ballerina, that doesn't mean you even have any coordination, let alone great dancing skill. and, dressing as superman does not mean you can fly

and, dressing up as a nazi for a fucking costume party does not mean you support killing joys or invading poland or even enjoy german food. and, it is not in poor taste to wear a costume that offends someone

***

in personal news, i was a little proud of myself during lost last night. see, i've read books by the likes of daniel quinn (ishmael, my ishmael, the story of b, etc.) and i generally subscribe to the negative view as to what the agricultural revolution has done to humanity, the makeshift prison in which it has confined our culture. so, on lost last night, even after they've pointed out that there is fruit all over the place and their diets are lacking in, if anything, protein, they reveal that sun has started a garden, and yay for them, it's presented like a great idea, a wonderful solution, nevermind that there still would be a lack of protein if not for the few fish jin has been catching, as locke has not been getting any boar of late. thing is, in this very episode, it was pointed out how easily and readily available fruit was, that it was all over the damn place. 48 (less now) survivors on a tropical island, and they need a fucking garden? the plants are already growing. the fruit is already there. you don't need to line it all up and mass grow it. figure their mystery island to have a big population explosion once these folks get over the trauma of their crash and get horny

what made me proud there, you ask. well, i was proud that my dislike of their garden idea (a la the big failure of the main character in the mosquito coast), their insistence on forcing the island to fit their civilized ideals, came so naturally. i didn't have to think of it later. as soon as i saw their garden, i was annoyed, wishing that with all the veiled (and not so veiled) reference to philosophy and human nature (as animal or not) that the writers would be smart enough to have someone (even if it had to be creepy ol locke) suggest they didn't need a damn garden

maybe that invisible monster is mother culture's little sister, and the garden will be the last straw that gets her to start slaughtering these pesky little fleas that crashed onto her island

***

and, i'm tired of people pointing out the incomplete fossil record as the perfect refutation of the theory of evolution. so we haven't recovered the remains of every animal that ever lived. big fucking deal. have these theists never heard of decay or decomposition? what we have found, however much you might think it looks like it comes in bursts of change, is plenty enough to refute creation, certainly. even if you take the genesis account of creation as man's metaphor for what god did, doesn't taking millions of years to create all the various forms of life (not to mention, letting all the dinosaurs die, not a very good job on the part of an omnipotent creator) kinda make god look a little pathetic and powerless?

or are we to jump to the intelligent design theory: god created stuff then sat back. hell, let's go with the theory that there was a big bang but god started it and hasn't done a thing since. thing is, then, what point is there in worshipping said god? what point is there in even acknowledging him? if he is such a hands off god, then he has placed the universe in the hands of the scientists not the religious folks. or was he only hands off accept for when he talked to noah and moses and david and all those other bibilical folks? if we side with the religious people, we have to accept a hands on god, and that does not fit with dinosaurs or everyday evolution

and, that just won't do

my ineptitude
Now Playing: a perfect circle - mer de nom

i'm behind schedule. i should have had this entry written already. i should have been a published author by now. i should have done something revolutionary by now. but, what are schedules to we pathetic, atheist outcasts, we few, we sad few who can't be bothered to live our lives like the rest of you, cheering on wars and lamenting one group of dead strangers rather than all of them

of course, that's just another excuse in a whole line of them i've got. it's what i do

i dropped out of college not because i couldn't take it anymore but because a paperwork mix up screwed me out of my grants and i couldn't afford to keep going, not because i realized then how completely unnecessary to my life to come college would be but because of things beyond my control

i lived for years socially alone, off to see movies all the time on my own, hiding in books (written and read) and television, no friends to speak of, not because i was socially inept but because i didn't need them, because all that jazz about how humans need companionship was a bunch of bullshit...

that's got to be it, right?

i've got a wife now, three kids, no more excuses in theory. but, i've ingrained my own supposed ineptitude in my head so far down, it's hard to let go. i throw in an excessive amount of movie rentals and a new interest in and knack for cooking and complicate things further. i try my hand at a daily comic, twice, and that goes nowhere (though there were some great strips among the many examples). i run this here blog, to an audience i could probably count on one hand, and i linger on message boards and waste time online, putting off my real writing time each day (even as i look forward to it, oddly enough), and i wonder why i don't have time for more exercise than i can manage to squeeze in, why i don't have more time to coach my son in some basic knowledge and reading skills, why i have no time at all to get any of my old manuscripts reedited and submitted to agents or publishers of late

it's all the same old tired excuse. multitask enough and, on some level, it doesn't even matter if any of the tasks are ever complete. do some of the tasks really well and the rest are diminished in importance, seemingly

and, i didn't even mention obsessing over the world's politics

isn't it still the season?

'tis the season is over. christmas and going into debt to get material goods for toys because we can't be bothered to show our love in more meaningful ways is over. some christmas lights remain. some trees are still up. some people are still insisting on caring about others (when they should be back to their usual selves already) just cause a bunch of folks died on the other side of the world (how many of those who are all concerned and donating money could even point out on a map the location of sri lanka two weeks ago?)

it seems like such a nice thing to want to help, though, doesn't it? it'd be a nice thing if the world had a good disaster relief organization like we have in this country, right? it's not arrogance that brings us the rescue of everybody else, is it? and, if it is, is that so wrong? if we could rescue everyone, save everyone from evil dictators or indifferent weather, if we could unilaterally bail out everybody, that would certainly be a good. but, it seems a little odd we stand so much against the redistribution of wealth and we don't want to give handouts to those in need right here at home, but a little weather (or, technically, i guess a tsunami isn't weather, since it's caused by an earthquake and not a storm) affects people who could have prepared for it in the first place (and who our own early warning system could have warned, if we were really so concerned for their well being) and we jump right in. a leader we helped put into power takes the power his people allowed him over many years to have and suddenly he's an evil we need to jump in and destroy, nevermind that we've got our own problems (and our own leader taking liberties with removing ours)

it's a strange dichotomy, our socially accepted indifference to the suffering around the world and our ability to completely bypass that indifference for grand gestures of caring... occasionally, and as long as the local news can show us local citizens who narrowly escaped, and show us women holding dead children and families broken, homes destroyed... except, how long will it be before we stop caring again, before we all forget where sri lanka is?

thing is, why do i bother complaining when people bother to do something that, arguably, is a good thing?

maybe i'm just so in love with being contrary, i can't help it. maybe i'm just sick of hypocrites and arrogant fools who think it's their place to save the world, but only when it's convenient or the news is depressing them. maybe we should stop reporting innocuous stories about celebrities and cover all the deaths around the world, the genocides, the disasters, not just the big ones, not just the ones with convenient access to oil, but every tragedy, every life lost, and see how long we can take it before we all implode

***

that being said, i meant to do another list entry today, but the list is so long it would be another week long, multiple entry number, and i don't care to do that again, so i'll just give the list (sans commentary), my 103 rentals* from blockbuster video in the last 122 (if my count is correct) days:

1. 0911 . candyman
2. 0911 . the game
3. 0913 . the station agent
4. 0915 . tremors 4 the legend begins
5. 0915 . the shape of things
6. 0916 . ringu
7. 0917 . run lola run
8. 0918 . the awful truth season two disk one
9. 0918 . cabin fever
10. 0919 . wrong turn
11. 0921 . the eye
12. 0921 . the awful truth season two disk two
13. 0923 . mean girls
14. 0923 . jeepers creepers 2
15. 0924 . the bourne identity
16. 0924 . man on fire
17. 0925 . fearless
18. 0927 . the last samurai
19. 0927 . the shipping news
20. 0928 . rebel without a cause
21. 0928 . crouching tiger, hidden dragon
22. 1001 . outfoxed rupert murdoch?s war on journalism
23. 1001 . the deep end
24. 1002 . the weather underground
25. 1002 . dirty pretty things
26. 1005 . ladykillers
27. 1005 . super size me
28. 1009 . casa de los babys
29. 1009 . young adam
30. 1011 . gattaca
31. 1011 . darkness falls
32. 1015 . fahrenhype 9/11
33. 1015 . fahrenheit 9/11
34. 1017 . the punisher
35. 1017 . master and commander the far side of the world
36. 1019 . the day after tomorrow
37. 1019 . the lost skeleton of cadavra
38. 1021 . tomie
39. 1021 . the office the complete first series
40. 1022 . following
41. 1023 . arrested development season one disk one
42. 1023 . the game
43. 1025 . south park the passion of the jew
44. 1025 . south park bigger, longer & uncut
45. 1027 . ratcatcher
46. 1028 . arrested development season one disk two
47. 1028 . dawn of the dead
48. 1030 . touching the void
49. 1102 . galaxy quest
50. 1104 . house of sand and fog
51. 1106 . arrested development season one disk three
52. 1106 . last house on the left
53. 1111 . the stone reader
54. 1111 . the thing
55. 1113 . the hunting of the president
56. 1119 . the chronicles of riddick
57. 1119 . bush?s brain
58. 1120 . i?m not scared
59. 1120 . sliding doors
60. 1122 . a day without a mexican
61. 1123 . control room
62. 1123 . joseph campbell and the power of myth
63. 1127 . dirty pretty things
64. 1129 . the saddest music in the world
65. 1129 . uncovered the war on iraq
66. 1202 . the da vinci code decoded
67. 1202 . spider-man 2
68. 1204 . the terminal
69. 1204 . the dreamers
70. 1206 . the pink panther
71. 1206 . audition
72. 1209 . existenz
73. 1209 . the bourne supremacy
74. 1210 . cracking the da vinci code
75. 1211 . love object
76. 1213 . dodgeball a true underdog story
77. 1213 . deadline
78. 1214 . collateral
79. 1214 . unlocking da vinci?s code
80. 1215 . the door in the floor
81. 1215 . zatoichi
82. 1217 . blood work
83. 1221 . napoleon dynamite
84. 1221 . shaun of the dead
85. 1222 . corn
86. 1222 . we don?t live here anymore
87. 1223 . shrek 2
88. 1225 . the exorcist
89. 1226 . cube 2 hypercube
90. 1228 . anchorman the legend of ron burgundy
91. 1228 . garden state
92. 1228 . pitch black
93. 1230 . ghost in the shell
94. 1230 . dogma
95. 1231 . elf
96. 1231 . ghost in the shell 2 innocence
97. 0103 . king arthur
98. 0103 . grand theft parsons
99. 0105 . buckaroo bonsai
100. 0107 . the alamo
101. 0107 . dark city
102. 0110 . hero
103. 0110 . zoolander

* important to note, of course, i have the rental pass, a monthly charge for two movies at a time, for as long as i like (though i try to get my movies back as fast as i can, obviously)

addendum: the benefit of the dna record

so, yesterday, i began my entry with this: "you know, there is one real benefit from the national id card...that even its supporters are ignoring"

thing is, i never got around to mentioning what that benefit was, so i figured i'd add an addendum now. dna on record with the government will help identify the bodies when the "terrorists" come after our homeland again

sounds kinda anticlimactic now. oh well

the mark of the beast

you know, there is one real benefit from the national id card (passed through the back door of the intelligence reform and terrorism prevention act of 2004) that even its supporters are ignoring

see, they'll go into how it will protect us from terrorists (nevermind that the "hijackers" of "9/11" didn't rely on false identification. they will, of course, mention that american citizens (making sure to point notable examples like john walker lindh and richard reid) sometimes act against the interests of the homeland, but only in passing, as if it were some arbitrary aberration. we all love the homeland, of course, and we should be proud to hold onto our national id card and have our dna and fingerprints on file, and to have electronic tracking chips in our pockets (or under our skin, like they already do with some pets)

what do we have to fear anyway, as long as we don't break any laws, right? i mean, it's not like republicans target innocent people for intimidation or vote challenging or unnecessary and illegal imprisonment, right? it's not like those in power, when given more and more power, won't use it wisely at all times and never abuse any of it, never build any secret prison camps, never authorize the torture of anyone deemed to stand against the homeland until that person bothers to confess to some crime, only to ensure more torture and more unlawful imprisonment

we should all be following all the laws, anyway, of course. we should all be living our lives to the exacting standards of our nation's christian morality, living our lives by the standards of the god in which we trust. and, any who dare live any other way--well, those pinko atheist socialist fags need not apply for any national id card anyway, cause we can identify them by the numbers we tattoo on their arms in the internment camps, by the cell in which we put them in between torture sessions

of course, who am i calling "we?" afterall, this little diatribe alone would likely put me on the government hitlist a few years into the future. all it's going to take is a tiny technological advance in our surveillance, and a baby step into the arena of big brother and the antichrist's reign here on earth. too bad it's the religious Right, those most likely to believe in the antichrist, who are harbouring him as their great leader in the crusade on terror, while we atheists don't even get to argue cause we can't stand behind even the intelligent design theory attempt to believe in god without bothering with church (and isn't that just the american way?)

shall we all fall in line and bow down now? or, do we wait out each little change, each passing bill that infringes our rights just a little more, or shall we hold onto the ideal that, whether or not it might be nice if we were all law abiding citizens, it might someday come to a point where each and every one of us could face a law we won't like, and isn't the whole point of free will that we have laws and choose to follow them because it is the right thing to do and not because we will be punished... oh wait, that way of thinking went the way of the dodo and that christ fella, tortured and killed on the cross, didn't it?

and, what happens when our blogs are linked to our dna, when all anonymity goes out the door and only the loudest get to not only rule but even have any say at all? what will constitute traitorous acts against the homeland in a future where our every movement and our every word can be recorded and tracked?

where can our mayflower go? or, is it possible to change this "homeland" of ours for the better, to break the system even while remaining inside it?

antony flew the coop
Mood:  irritated

• "A British philosophy professor who has been a leading champion of atheism for more than a half-century has changed his mind"
• "British philosopher Antony Flew has been called the world's most influential philosophical atheist"
• "After half a century the leading atheism proponent in the world now concludes that there is/was a God"

thing is:

1. never heard of him
2. don't care if he'll settle for the cop out of a god who created shit but now keeps his hands off
3. don't much care for philosphers in general anyway
4. really don't care for how it took like a dozen or more sites to even find different wording (i was going to quote a whole list of lines about him, but most news sites just used the AP article, pretty much verbatim)

see, this flew guy, who apparently was the god among atheists, to coin a phrase, decided that the intelligent design theory is the way to go after years of demanding that theists find the evidence for god

see, he can't figure out (and can't seem to find a scientist to explain it to him well enough) how the first organisms came into being. me--i think it's fairly simple. all the organisms we've got now are based around dna, which is nothing but chains of proteins which are nothing but strings of amino acids, which, belive it or not, are quite simple molecular constructs. and, it's in their nature to join together, and in the nature of the resulting proteins to also join together, and there you get dna, which is the basic building block of life. and, even if you can't pinpoint the exact moment when such chains started moving and living, does that really mean you jump on the intelligent design bandwagon?

and, if you do jump on that bandwagon, then don't you have to explain how god came to be? if you insist on explanations, then take it all the way, or accept at face value what is obvious and evident, that lifeforms evolve from generation to generation. and, no one can debate that, unless he has a serious mental defect. all you need is a group of more than one person or animals and take a look at the differences between them. if there was no evolution, they would be identical. of course, the devout religious freaks don't get that. they hear the word evolution, get offended that we're calling their parents monkeys and flip a switch in their heads that turn off their ears, not to mention the logical parts of their brains

nah, let's forget all the evidence. let's all bow down to the magic man in the moon (or sun, rather, since even a lot of what makes christ what he is today comes from earlier sun worship) and praise him and may he bless us all, keep us safe from the wars we wage

and, however many people read this flew guy's work, however many people loved it and learned from it, were changed by it, we (atheists, that is) don't have a christ, a pope, even a minister. we don't need spokespeople and teachers (though the latter can be helpful and the former could be useful). we don't need a savior, especially not some guy who got old and settled for the incomplete intelligent design theory

and, on a tangent here, why can't the news people write their own articles rather than regurgitate the AP words? why spread the same bits of information by so many means when we could all just as easily subscribe to the AP wire? how about we get some different points of view in the news (in regards to fallen atheists or the war on terror or that damn tsunami)

what was i talking about?
Mood:  incredulous

tucker carlson is out... for like five minutes. cnn has removed him from crossfire (and might be losing that show along with him) and employment. but, he's already in talks to have a primetime show on msnbc, and i'm sure fox news is lined up right behind them. plus, apparently, he's already got a pbs show

of course, it's not like crossfire or carlson will be replaced by something ultimately constructive. this country is all about argument over debate, yelling over your opposition rather than finding a middle ground or an actual solution

the war in iraq is costing us something like $6 billion a month, supposedly, and there's no real way to win. reportedly, there are more insurgents than us troops now, so unless we openly start killing everyone, this can't end well unless we get out of the way

but, by all means, let's keep fighting people in their own homes, in their mosques, in their streets. let's keep torturing "enemy combatants" and forcing them to make false confessions. let's keep doing all the ruinous shit we're alrady doing

we all love the status quo, right? we're all so comfortable in our own lives that we have time to mourn laci peterson and bobbie jo stinnett and the victims of the tsunami, to worry about terri schiavo. we can worry about which guy the bachelorette picks, about which survivor outlasts, outwits and outplays...

"the world's stable now, people are happy; they get what they want, and they never want what they can't get. they're well off, they're safe, they're never ill, they're not afraid of death; they're blissfully ignorant of passion and old age." - brave new world

except, it isn't the world that's stable. hell, it's not even all of this country. but, as long as we can all sit around, sedated by flouride and television and prescription drugs, pretending that our world is stable, what will we care about the rest of reality, about our neighbors, living with chronic or debilitating diseases, our neighbors living with abuse, our neighbors living on the street, our nieghbors making war with one another... until it makes the news and grabs our attention for a moment, and makes us think... at least until the next reality show is on, and can you believe they'll eat cow testicles for money? and, did you see what richard hatch did to sue hawk? and, hey, did you catch the latest episode of lost? are sayid and shannon going to get together? and, is rose's husband really alive? does that support the notion that all the cast is already dead and this is purgatory or hell or some such thing? and...

what was i talking about?

oh, right. all hail emperor bush. all grieve the tsunami victims. all hate the terrorists

bring on emmanuel goldstein and let's get on with this shit and stop sugarcoating it

what are your intentions?
Mood:  caffeinated
warren ellis posted a quote i liked on the bad signal today:

"We have to change the negative things into positive. In today's Japanese film industry we always say we don't have enough budget, that people don't go to see the films. But we can think of it in a positive way, meaning that if audiences don't go to the cinema we can make any movie we want. After all, no matter what kind of movie you make it's never a hit, so we can make a really bold, daring movie. There are many talented actors and crew, but many Japanese movies aren't interesting. Many films are made with the image of what a Japanese film should be like. Some films venture outside those expectations a little bit, but I feel we should break them." - Takashi Miike

i went on and on a week or two ago about how tv networks should stop all trying to be number one and worry about putting out quality product, and people acted like i was a crazy man (this before they believed me an obnoxious prick in regards to that whole jerry orbach debacle). how dare anyone suggest networks not just do everything for money. how dare anyone suggest that an artistic medium be used for art and not just commercial gain

of course, networks go for tried and true formats, regurgitating the old material or produce reality show after reality show. and, don't get me wrong, some of those "reality" shows can be pretty good, or at least enjoyable if not anything of great quality. but, there's got to be a point where the dollar doesn't rule all, where it's better to put out good shows that get a nice critical (and audience) response but don't necessarily get the ratings

but, there's the rub, right? how does one get a good audience response and not get the ratings?

of course, the thing is, what makes for good ratings anyway? does a show have to be number one to be any good? or does second place still stand for something? out of the hundred or more shows that are strewn about the field of network and basic cable television (not to mention pay tv channels like hbo or showtime), why isn't second place worth something? so, the current advertising system (talking commercial television, of course) makes it so that if the ratings are lower than projected (and, how about we get some more realistic projections) then ad revenue drops and money is often even owed back to the advertisers. but, come on. are we to pretend that low rated shows don't still attract advertisers? are we to pretend that even the worst, least watched show doesn't earn at least enough audience that someone would want to buy ad time? obviously, if the budget for the particular show is not covered by the revenue, a network would be hard pressed to care to keep it in production, but there's got to be some middle ground, a place that embraces even more cult series and gives low rated shows the opportunity to find an audience

my ideal system would treat network and basic cable shows like pay cable shows, namely, give them a complete season to tell a story. if the audience wills it, produce a second season. if there is no audience, let that one season stand alone. maybe, stop trying to create a series that will last many years and instead focus on one year at a time, leaving open the possibility (or not) of further seasons. more short term programming, less long term. get your audience to trust you for your production choices (a la hbo) and stop depending on competing endlessly for number one

the network is in the business of television, sure (like the government is in the business of war). but, the producers and writers and actors (like soldiers) should still be held accountable for what goes on, and arguably should be more interested in the art of the product rather than its commercial value. most shows will not be hits. most films will not be blockbusters. most books will not be bestsellers. so, why not do all you (we) can do to make a good product? see, what are your intentions? are you just in it for the money or would you like to create art? the networks doesn't have any programming without the production cast and crew, so, if the individuals responsible for content put more care into it, the networks won't have a choice but to air what they get

or i'm just a crazed idealist?

begin the year on a destructive note
sure, the tsunami was last week, and last year, but the media gets to start the year talking about the destruction still, about the death and the heroic efforts of the united states to help out... a little

we are in the middle of a war, for christ's sake... or is that a war for christ's sake (sans the comma)? can't anybody remember that, and not get upset when we don't immediately offer more monetary aid than every other nation that is poorer than us? i mean, we've got iraqis to save. there's only so many countries we can help at any one time

now, if the indonesians really want our assistance, they should just convince bush and his cronies that the terrorists (that area is one of those supposed terrorist strongholds, still, isn't it?) are acting up. then, we'll send in a bunch of troops, kill a good chunk of the remaining population and start "rebuilding"

of course, it's nice that we're bothering to at least try to do something positive (and that we raised our initial monetary offer tenfold). it's hard to argue against disaster relief

---

last year ended and some of us are still alive. that's a plus.

bush will be inaugurated (at a cost higher than our initial monetary offer to the tsunami relief, mind you) soon. that's not a plus. iraq will have its election (and, sure it might be "fair" but how fair really? you think the ballots in the more dangerous neighborhoods or the insurgent territories will get some nice security from us (or us backed iraqi) troops?). my birthday's this month, and i still intend to do an all day lord of the rings extended version marathon

i've been writing again (nearly a hundred pages into the rewrite of clubhouse blues and readying in my head for the second gardia novel, lion, horse, tree)

it's the year to be honest and straightforward and to get things done... not that we may ever necessarily know what needs to be done. of course, not knowing has never stopped people in this country before, has it? better to be proactive and wrong than sit back and do nothing...

or, screw both of those options and figure out what needs to be done and do it. if you can, anyway

the season of lists (and dishonesty) part two - movies part four
Mood:  irritated

i wrote an essay a few years back supporting hitler, arguing he was just a politician not a mass murderer. just last week, i wrote a blog entry here calling santa claus a pedophile. and, it takes me posting about jerry orbach on messages boards for people to freak out. well, to be fair, some of my essays shortly after that whole september 11, 2001 situation (particularly my duckspeak patriotism one) got some people angry at me, calling me unamerican, calling for me to be at the center of the next attack. today, the line to dance on my grave has begun. i've been called a prick and an asshole and i'm fairly sure i don't care

i choose not to revere the dead simply because they are dead, because they've left behind family and friends or tv audience members who liked them. even if i am the only exception, the only one who will say something bad when it's "inappropriate" i think i will have to continue to do so for as long as i can. we have enough blatant dishonesty in this country and this world already. we enough people pretending to care for total strangers many miles away (just because they happen to make headlines) yet couldn't care less about their next door neighbors or the local homeless population or kids with diseases or the victims of that damn tsunami who don't happen to have been american or related to americans or who didn't capture dramatic video of the incident. billions of people on the planet and we can't be bothered to care about more than a few at a time. and, to be fair, that would be fine if it didn't mean we could be so uncaring about the rest... of course, this from the guy who suggested we let starving children die for the good of the rest of us. you'd think that would fall into line with the logic of the iraq war or the war on terror... well, you'd think that if you were a simple minded fool, anyway. and, sure, plenty of you are simple minded fools, but i'm fairly sure i'm not talking to you lot. i'm talking to the smarter ones, the ones who are sick of sitting idly by while people get more shallow and more separate and more uncaring, except for those isolated headline incidents, cause as long as they can grieve openly from time to time, they don't have to fucking grieve all the damn time like we depressive atheists who are sick of politicians and sick of wars and sick of the media, regardless of which wing you happen to think controls it

-insert deep breath here-

i am blunt. i am honest. i am sarcastic. i am cynical and pessimistic. i am crude and rude and obnoxious and i don't like most people. i don't like most television, though i absolutely love the medium. i don't like most films, though i absolutely love that medium as well. i don't like politicians and generally think anyone who would bother to run for president is not qualified simply because he's arrogant enough to think he is. that being said, i am arrogant. i do not believe in any god and i am tired of people who do. i don't think that people deserve respect just because they are dead. i don't think that something i could have said two days ago (taking the specific, recent example of jerry orbach again) to little fanfare should suddenly be anathema because he died before i had the chance to say it

but, what the fuck do i know, right? i am nobody, just a lone voice on the liberal side of things who doesn't even like most liberals, just a guy who will, despite that old saying that "if you can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all" will not only say something that isn't nice but jump at the opportunity to do so. funny thing is, just because i'm still alive, people can tell me to go to hell, call me a prick and an asshole, when what i said to start the whole mess wasn't even that bad: basically, i said that i wouldn't miss lenny briscoe and jerry orbach wasn't that great an actor and had a grating voice.

but, again, i digress. it's what i do

80. rumble fish - i think i liked this hinton novel better than the outsiders and this monochromatic take on it (with flashes of color) makes the characters (and the actors (including mickey rourke before he got weird)) stand out. the staging and the direction pull you in much like hinton's original, relatively simple narrative does. as far as coppola goes, i'd put this film above even the original godfather
81. say anything - gotta love the main character who doesn't want to buy anything, sell anything or process anything for a living, a romantic who knows exactly who he is and what he wants, and is actually able to go after it. a classic teen film that holds up over time much better than almost every other one
82. schindler?s list - sure the subject itself is a powerful one full of images that can haunt you and yank on those cliched heartstrings, but the film itself is a grand example of cinema, the climax of spielberg's otherwise great directing career, with wonderful performances all around but notably liam neeson, ben kingsley and ralph fiennes. one of those films that really sticks with you after it's over
83. se7en - and a completely different kind of film that also sticks with you after it's over. this take a serial killer lets you know from the start that this is not some buddy cop film, not even your run-of-the-mill serial killer film but something far darker and far less benign, a creepy, memorable romp into sin and the darkness of the soul, so to speak
84. shakespeare in love - and then there's lighter fare like this, a brilliant take on shakespeare and writing and star-crossed lovers
85. shawshank redemption, the - a prison-set film about hope and freedom and redemption, based on stephen king's novella and starring the wonderful tim robbins and morgan freeman
86. short cuts - intertwined stories and lives, a large ensemble cast
87. signs - get over that stupid argument that aliens who can't handle water wouldn't come to earth. the film ends with a big shout out to god and spirituality and i still like it. great performances, great direction, and some chilling moments
88. sixth sense, the - and then there's shyamalan's first (as far as fame goes anyway) film. whether you could guess the end or not, whether you've already seen it and know the end and rewatch it or not, the structure holds up, tricking you so easily you don't even notice. osment is great, and collette and willis hold their own pretty damn well. hell, donnie walhberg does with one scene more than some actors can do with whole films
89. spitfire grill, the - it's got some cheesiness, sure, but i think the tragedy of it, the tragic tone of the whole, makes it work. the one fault in this one that bugs me is we don't get enough of the backstory as to "johhny b" even in the end, when a more detailed explanation as to his situation could have been inserted easily. alison elliot is great, as our the supporting cast: burstyn, harden and patton
90. stand by me - stephen king again, the epitome of coming of age films, with a great cast all around (not always the case with such young casts), with comedic beats and sad beats and everything in between
91. star wars a new hope - there's much going on behind the scenes in this one, almost so much that it seems like lucas didn't even understand the politics of it until now, hence the new, shinier episodes
92. star wars return of the jedi - i never had a problem with the ewoks. i'm one of the crazy few who actually appreciated the cute little guys and their part in things (though, for fun, you gotta read about the endor holocaust sometime), and this film made for a great conclusion to the trilogy
93. star wars the empire strikes back - arguably the best of the star wars films, and i'd contend that's because it's the most real in its tone, less a mythic tale than lucas probably even intended and more a serious story involving great characters and fantastic situations
94. sweet hereafter, the - atom egoyan again, though this time adapted from a novel by russell banks. one of those out of order narratives that works because the pieces build together nicely into a whole, rather than the whole thing just seeming like a gimmick (a la later episodes of boomtown)
95. swingers - you may not like the characters but you gotta admit they are well drawn for what they are, and the meandering plot works well
96. taxi driver - decay, both mental and societal, robert de niro in a pivotal moment in his early career. good stuff
97. terms of endearment - and, i'm getting more and more brief with these comments as i near the end, getting a little tired of the list thing actually. this one has a great cast (winger, maclaine, nicholson, daniels) and a great script about a mother and daughter whose lives insist on being connected despite their differences
98. texas chainsaw massacre - raw and scary in ways too many horror films since have tried and failed to be
99. toy story - pixar turns ensemble writing into something fine, putting extra meaning and/or jokes into even the smallest of details
100. toy story 2 - and this sequel actually surpassed the original, the emotional life of the toys being forgotten playing stronger than buzz's realization that he isn't "real" in the first film
101. truman show, the - i still contend this film, without the audience bits and without any foreknowledge of what's going on, would be one of the greatest viewing experiences ever. alas, it comes close, oh so very close, but can't be the best, as it is, cause we don't get to experience the confusion that truman does, but it still works
102. twelve monkeys - a convoluted plot, time travel, some of the best production design in any recent science fiction film and great performances from willis and stowe, not to mention brad pitt's award winning role
103. unbreakable - though the village won't make my list (despite some damn good set up in the early scenes), i go against the usual flow and put this shyamalan film up there with the sixth sense and signs. even the abrupt ending works if you look at the film from the right perspective, say, as the first part of an incomplete story, the first issue of the comic book, the first chapter in a longer story we will never get to and never need to see
104. usual suspects, the - a brilliant screenplay and a great ensemble make for a wonderful film here, something that, like the sixth sense or fight club, plays very differently on second view
105. zero effect - it's this and adaptation. that vie constantly for the title of my favorite film. this one, with all its clever twists and turns, and superb characters... if only the tv series take on this would have had a chance... well, it probably would have been cancelled or watered down, though i'd still love a film sequel cause darryl zero is as brilliant a character as he is a detective

and, that's it. watched garden state last night and while i'm not sure if it's worthy of the list, it was certainly good and a better film, objectively speaking, than a few that did make the list. and, there were other notable absences (the return of the king and clerks (and once i get around to rewatching dogma, it could probably make it) for example)

as for my rank of prick, if you don't like me, you can get in on dancing on my grave once i am gone. if you want in, just go post here