second autumn

My Ethos, At The and of the Day

Well, elections will soon be held. I've been rating a lot about the old GOP on my Facebook. I don't think anybody truly cares, but I felt I should jot down exactly how my political thinking actually works.


I believe big business is indistinguishable from big government.

I believe that the right will never be pragmatic from an economic standpoint as long as right wing evangelism informs much of their policy.

I believe tight knit religious communities are barely distinguishable from communism, have you ever heard of "monastic communes."

For that matter,mi believe libertarian economic beliefs can be and have been taken to beliefs that are they are de facto religion, ergo their potency as an economic sensibility are mitigated,
second autumn

(no subject)

There was a study on political preferences and show preferences. They seem to be trying to analyze it, although in my opinion, is not a tough nut to crack. By definition, "conservatives" would prefer material that is tried and true and appeals to the most people, while "liberals" would respond to specialized, cutting edge material. "Silent majority", "plays in Peoria", or whatever Nixonisms.

What I do find interesting is the discrepancy in reality TV watching, and the theory that the reality show, when distilled to the preferences that evidently correspond with their scripted counterparts are either very inspiring, or very cynical.

But it's also made me think about the weird schism about the paradox of how television is both better and worse than it's ever been. It may apply to entertainment in general, but it's like, if I were to serve a meal that represent today's cultural mores, it would be Cornish Game Hen with a side of Cheetos.
second autumn

(no subject)

It's pretty common in comedies for the female love interest to be 1) Much hotter and 2) Much younger for the lead. Usually because the male star conceived of the project, has producing clout, and sometimes even the ingenue was a fan of his. Adam Sandler isn't quite as guilty as say, Rob Schneider is, but yes, he has gone into that realm. (With, for instance, Emmanuelle Chiqri)

But whoever wrote is choosing the wrong tree to bark up. Because anyone who has seen Cactus Rose, or even movies in general, know Brooklyn Decker is not the real love interest. Jennifer Aniston is. He's not really going to end up with the former, at the end.

Sorry, spoiler alert guys.
second autumn

(no subject)

Keith Olbermann has been "suspended indefinitely" from NBC for contributions to congressional cadindates. While it's hard to call it outrageous or unfair, as technically, it is MSNBC's policy, it has a lot of people suspicious nonetheless, due to it being wrong, but from, far unheard of for pundits to contribute to campaign donations. Even folks Olbermann has badmouthed have have gone to bat for him over what they perceive as a hypocrisy. It has people wondering if "something else is up", whether Olbermann has some kind of skeleton in the closet or volatile personality the bigwigs don't want to deal with (Not out of the question), or if it's the Comcast merger trying to shake off one of the Left's most well-known frontmen. (Wouldn't put it past them)

A lot of people were very eager about the Comcast takeover of NBC because it would mean Jeff Zucker's head,but at the end of the day, that was more about Darth Vader force-choking an incompetent underling than King Richard banishing an unscrupulous noble. (If Comcast had presided over the late night war, they probably would have chosen one (Leno) and plant child pornography in the desk of the other (Conan))I guess we'll find out in a couple of weeks when either Olberman returns with a half-assed mea culpa, or Rachel Maddow also finds herself disnorably discharged.

*word has it that technically it's not even MSNBC's policy
second autumn

(no subject)

Ah, Election Day. The Tea Party movement is expecting big wins tonight, and while I'm not particularly looking forward to their happy faces of victory, I don't fear for the country in general. Because seriously, this is the party's platform:

"Vote for us, because fuck the government!"

What is going to happen now that they're the government? Either their base is going to feel betrayed, because there is no way any of these Rand Pauls are going to accomplish shit-all during their terms. And that's if they don't become just a corrupt as they believe the incumbents are. Where is an anti-establishment movement going to go when they're the establishment?

People are talking about Republicans taking things back, or now they're the way the country is turning. But...they only started losing seats en masse six years ago. That means if you're a grad student, the country has shifted its party alignment three, four times during your studies. It means the "country is taken away/back" every second Harry Potter movie. That's not a political era. That's, at worst, a war of attrition. At best, the political equivalent to a long line outside the bathroom, "waiting for their turn." I suppose it has all the trappings, because the party on the outside is squirming and impatient, while the party on the inside pisses away and makes a mess of things.

The 21st Century has been the New Morning in America, indeed.
second autumn

(no subject)

Between TV Guide's awkward presentation of movies nobody watches and panel discussions on Britney Spears breakdowns, they occasionally do lists ranking the sexiest ___ in film and TV. In time for Halloween, they had a special "Hottest Vampires, Werewolves and Mutants". One of these things is not quite like the other, huh? If you wanted to highlight how sexy X-Men alumni are, it's not like one couldn't give superheroes their own inane countdown. It's even more pointless because Hugh Jackman has played a werewolf, and Ryan Reynolds has played a vampire ("He's an ex-addict with biceps and a smart mouth. Like the Robert Downey Jr for the vampire set." Oh wow, how did I out-talking head a Maxim editor?) Surely there's plenty of sexy choices amongst the more legitimately supernatural. Ghosts? Witches? With that, you got Alyson Hannigan, Nicole Kidman, and whichever Harry Potter cast member your lawyer has okayed you on. It's just some generic "geek sex symbol" list that leans heavy on vampires.
second autumn

(no subject)

Searching through television listings, seeing which channels are getting into the spirit. ABC Family has been doing a good enough job the last couple of days, although why does Charlie and the Chocolate Factory have to be shoe-horned into every holiday marathon?

Special Fail awards go to;

G4: A Cheaters? Back to the Future? You're supposed to be the channel for the dork crowd. Back to the Future is awesome, but except for Marty dressing up like a spaceman, it's not particularly related the holiday, and Cheaters is targeted towards the kinds of people who are out right now, dressed as Lady gaga and stumbling under the cumbersomeness of it while their boyfriend is boning someone dressed as Katy Perry in the bathroom. The only ones home to watch it are very sad boys who will burn in resentment that they can't get girls as it is.

TNT: They're running a few James Bond movies. Because it's a marathon, they're doing it on purpose. They went out of their way to say "You know what would be good for Halloween? James Bond!" I agree that it's a big enough franchise to show marathons on special occasions and such, but except for Live and Let Die, they're as far away from scary as any major film series.

and most of all, TBS, with a double feature of Forrest Gump and Titanic. Not only are they not scary movies, but they're like...they would be outright milquetoast if not for the high body counts. Are they good counterpogramming? I'm not sure the kind of person who has an aversion to hype or commercialization would be very welcoming to these movies. Forrest Gump is probably specifically for those people who's haunted houses feature abortions and AIDs.
second autumn

(no subject)

GQ has a photoshoot dedicated to Glee (And first of all, it needs pointing out that Glee is not the biggest show on television. It's extremely popular, and not in that bullshit "buzz" way the CW believes. But it's not the biggest show on TV, and even if you count recent shows, Modern Family is roughly as popular and acclaimed) which seems to be an attempt to get the boys interested in it or something and I'm...not that turned on.

these two are the only ones I really like, and I have a penis. They just really seem so desperate. Especially Lea Michele who's like "Oh my God, I've been trying so hard to be the next Babara Striesand I need to remind them I can be the next Megan Fox" She showed some skin in another magazine a week ago, and it seemed more natural. This is a very plastic, tacked-on kind of sexy. (And I have to admit, I don't much care for the lollipop thing. I find most hard candies kind of gross, and if it's trying to infantalize her a little bit, that's disturbing. It's all kind of trashy in its own right, and comes all across the more forced trying to format a show that isn't really GQ in its cadence like Mad Men is.

I'm sure there will be complaints about Cory Nesmith not showing any skin as well.
second autumn

(no subject)

Yeah, politics again, but this is pretty rich.

Doctor Who will be filming in the U.S. for the first time, and part of that plot apparently includes the Doctor meeting (a) President of the United States. Assuming it's Obama, somebody remarks that "Oh great, he finally meets the president and it's the worst one since Carter.", and follows it up with comments about FDR.

This is actually a very strange comment. Not only because Doctor Who is, from what I can tell, the most politically correct franchise I can think of. Not only because the fanbase is the most pinko-commie collection of liberals you'll find on the internet. (Yes, that includes anime) But because Doctor Who is a nationalized TV show.