Scary monsters, super creeps

Blargle 1 Comment »

For Halloween, Ace is having a scary movie thread. Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be anything all that scary on tv tonight (I’m thinking of traditional scary like old Dracula films or Vincent Price movies, not the tedious slasher flicks that people think are what horror should be these days) — just stupid things like that dumb “Ghost Hunter” program on Scifi. Note to today’s entertainment producers: fake “reality” junk like “Ghost Hunters,” which consists of some people pretending to scare themselves in underlit abandoned buildings even though we know they are surrounded by a production crew and no self-respecting supernatural creature would allow itself within five miles of all that hubbub, are not scary — just annoying. How do these things stay on the air?

I do happen to still have that unwatched dvd of Shaun of the Dead, as well as a dvd I bought in the bargain bin of White Zombie (the old Bela Lugosi movie, not of the modern-day rock band), so maybe I’ll watch that. Boo!

Here’s something for the soundtrack.

And here’s something truly frightening — where did Donna keep her Tardis key?

Second update: okay… maybe this is even more frightening. Or maybe just kind of disgusting. Though he does make good “labor” faces.

Next day update: I watched no movies! I went to bed instead. I fail at Halloween.

Trackbacks refused

admin stuff 1 Comment »

On my previous post I got three trackbacks in my moderation queue from three separate blogs on the website that after long consideration — oh, okay, short consideration, like maybe two seconds — I decided to mark as “spam” and delete. My decision was based partly on the fact that all three blogs, though having different design, had the same content, including their “about” page which explained that they were a news aggregator for US election news. Since I am not a news provider but a personal blog I decided to opt out of the whole “let’s be a global political intardnet” thing. If you want me to link to you I suggest you 1) have a personal blog under some sort of personal name or nickname, 2) actually be a person instead of some sort of conglomeration or bot, and 3) email me (email link at the bottom of this site) with a complimentary email that actually has an opinion in it, 4) register on my blog and leave a comment (the first one will be moderated but I am quick), 5) trackback to me from your own personal blog that you a real person have put up and been blogging to for at least one other time with something that indicates you are a person not a faceless company or bot. KTHXBYE

Update: okay, make that four bloody trackbacks I’ve sent to the same place I send all those drug spams. Die, motherfuckers.

Foreign writer suggests nose removal as face-saving solution

Seeds of Our Demise 14 Comments »

Canadian Rick McGinnis shows that sometimes the foreign perspective, no matter how near the foreigner is to this country of mine, is still the wrong perspective. He says that women should not vote in the presidential election as “payback” to the way we supposedly have been treated by this campaign — you know, all the attacks on Sarah Palin, the pushing of economic theories that will damage our economy and therefore the less-secure economic status of women, even the way Hillary Clinton was treated (I for one did not care for the whole “pants suit” gibes that both sides of the political spectrum engaged in — there’s nothing wrong with pants suits, you misogynist, real-women-only-wear-dresses-and-pantyhose jerks). But Mr. McGinnis is wrong. Here’s why:

— It would have no effect on the hordes of swooning fangirls who cream in their thongs at the very sight of Barack Obama, and who squeal and faint at his speeches.

— It would have no effect on the Sarah Palin haters, many, if not most of whom are women. Has Rick McGinnis never heard of jealousy and envy? When it comes to hatin’ our fellow female, men have nothing on us.

— It would have no effect on the men voting for Obama. True, if some miracle happened and all women stayed home, then McCain would probably win by a larger margin, but telling McCain’s female supporters to stay home only takes votes away from McCain, and as I’ve already said Obama has plenty of fangirls. Whether there are enough of them to make a difference in the election process remains to be seen, but telling women who would otherwise vote for the McCain/Palin ticket to not vote seems to me to be beyond stupid.

— It would rightly be seen as an instance, not of principled political stance, but of pique. “He talked mean about a girl!” In this day and age more than ever the last thing we need are women making decisions based on emotion, and that’s what they would be doing if they let the sight of some stringy-armed coffee-cave denizen wearing a “Sarah Palin is a cunt” t-shirt stay make them stay home and sulk.

— It would not do any of this: “wreak havoc with pollsters and campaign operatives at the very least, and delegitimize a dispiriting and tainted election at best.” He rightly calls is a “slap” in the next sentence — and slapping is what hysterical females do to their boyfriends for forgetting their birthday or something trivial like that. See my point above.

— It would punish McCain for no good reason that I can see, even though he’s run one of the politest, cleanest campaigns I’ve witnessed in a long time.

I don’t even know why this was written. It won’t happen — women don’t think as a bloc, really we don’t, and those few women who might be influenced for this sort of thinking will disappear into the general mass of people who didn’t vote for whatever reason, so I guess he made his word count quota for the week. A better article that he could have come up with: “I am urging all non-American citizens to shut up about the US presidential election.”

(Via Kathy Shaidle.)

Update: Kathy thinks I missed a satire. (See comments.) That’s as may be — I usually catch these things, but it just didn’t read that way to me. I’m putting this here, though, just to let people know there is a possibility that Rick was being tongue-in-cheek. Canadian humor is famously muted; I guess that’s an effect of living in a country where free speech is seen as a vulgar “American” value and the government has Niceness Enforcement Squads to make sure no one hurts anyone else’s feelings. If they catch you I think they wrap you in tons of pink batting (Canada’s version of red tape — it’s much warmer) and leave you on an ice floe. (If you don’t believe me, read Kathy’s blog. Okay, maybe the ice floe bit is a little exaggerated.)

Cocktail Conservatives

Seeds of Our Demise 4 Comments »

Kathy Shaidle is right — this article, or whatever it is, by Kathleen Parker, seems to have been written while she was three sheets to the wind. It’s more not-so-disguised drooling over Obama, but it also reads like she has just now noticed this cool guy running for Prez and she’s putting his photo up on her Myspace page as we speak. He’s “more Reaganesque than Reagan”? His recent Sham-Wow!-esque infomercial “presented real-people stories and real-people solutions with the voice and demeanor of Mr. Rogers”? And she sneers at the “right-wing blogosphere” for pointing out his hypocrisy concerning the situation of his elderly relatives, despite the fact that his entire campaign is focused on making Americans who dare to make more money than they “need” guilty? How insulting. And this is a doozy:

Four years ago, Obama famously described his vision of America as neither liberal nor conservative, neither black, white, Latin nor Asian.

“There’s the United States of America,” he said. “We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.”

Should he win on Tuesday, let’s hope he meant it.

Um, no, Kathleen, I can not see that he “meant it,” not after a campaign whose racial message basically boiled down to “if you don’t vote for me, you’re a racist.” He didn’t have to say this out loud — he just let everyone else on his team say it for him. Does this woman live under a rock most of the year? Hasn’t she noticed one goddamn thing that’s been going on? I used to be a regular reader of the National Review, online and in print, but that hasn’t been true in years; this is one of the many reasons why.

I can haz a water bear?

Blargle 1 Comment »

I propose that the scariest animal in the known universe is the water bear. Not for the following reasons:

They are unique in the animal world for being able to tolerate and sometimes even thrive under such conditions as: 303 degrees F (151 degrees C), altitudes of over 6000 meters, oceanic depths below 4000 meters, both poles, the equator, cold approaching absolute zero, 1,000 times more radiation than any other animal, and even the vacuum of space (a very useful trait for those water bear cosmonauts). They are found everywhere.

No, they are terrifying because… they’re just so darn cute. No really, I want a plush toy of one. Christmas is coming!

(Title of the post changed! for more silliness.)


Parallel Worlds 2 Comments »

After five special episodes through the next year, David Tennant is leaving Doctor Who. Too bad, I thought he was a pretty good Doctor. Also hawt. But I can’t blame him for not wanting to be typecast, like Tom Baker was. Also, I’m relieved he won’t be subject anymore to the “the Doctor-is-the-Messiah” complex that seems to have overtaken the series. If I had been him I would have quit after the Tinkerbell Jesus treatment he got at the end of the 2007 run, but that’s one of the many reasons I’m not in showbiz. I can’t imagine who they’re going to replace him with, but they’re making noises about picking a black person or a woman, because being PC is more important than making sense. And maybe they can give him/her/it some sort of Time Lord disability, so crippled kids can identify with their hero — because we all know that no one can identify with any fictional character that is at all unlike them. That’s why science fiction and fantasy are such unpopular genres.

The show’s head guy promises a “spectacular” ending; I’d rather just have a well-written episode. But Russell T. has shown that when it comes to a choice between flashy special effect and coherent writing, he thinks coherency is for squares. (Watch the end of “Last of the Time Lords” if you don’t believe me.)

Anyway, what I wanna know is, what’s Davy gonna do next? And will he be naked? You didn’t see me type that.

Update: well, at least the fans are taking it well. Yep. (Backs away slowly.)


Parallel Worlds, Seeds of Our Demise 2 Comments »

Remember that bizarre pie rant Obama went on? Well, I found this and about laughed my ass off. McCain! Why you no like pie?????

In space, no one can hear you squeal like a pig

Seeds of Our Demise 4 Comments »

The latest Star Trek movie is due to come out soon. Boy is it ever. (Seriously, are those men? And I don’t just mean whoever is playing Uhura. I never thought of William Shatner as being among the most manly of men, but come on…)


Seeds of Our Demise 2 Comments »

The next time some foreign person starts macking on about the “vulgarity” of American culture, you might want to send them this link.

(Via Kathy Shaidle.)

The Convergence of the Idiocies

Parallel Worlds, Seeds of Our Demise 6 Comments »

I’ll bet if you pointed out to professional sparkleAthiestsparkle Richard Dawkins that he’s just allied himself with his arch-enemies the Krazy boo!KKKristianboo! fundamentalists with this upcoming project of his

[…]to write a book aimed at youngsters in which he will warn them against believing in “anti-scientific” fairytales.

…(you know, like — ha-aatcha! — Harry Potter) he would be totally flummoxed. The book promises to be crushingly boring and I’m sure the young folk will avoid it in droves:

“I plan to look at mythical accounts of various things and also the scientific account of the same thing. And the mythical account that I look at will be several different myths, of which the Judeo-Christian one will just be one of many.

“And the scientific one will be substantiated, but appeal to children to think for themselves; to look at the evidence. Always look at the evidence.”

Zzzzz… It may, however, appeal to snarky teenagers as well as those mentally marooned in their teenager years who, like Dawkins, can with a straight face promote the Philip Pullman fantasies while decrying fantasy as a genre. Not to mention, who can be a-okay with taking a bit part in (and thus promoting) Doctor Who, which show despite being classified as “science fiction” has about as much connection with science as Lang’s Fairy Tales. In any case, I am sure that Mr. Dawkins’ real animus against fantasy stories (except for the Pullman novels) is due to the Christian underpinnings, or influences, manifest in works such as the Harry Potter books, Tolkien’s saga, and C.S. Lewis’ Narnia series which happened to be Philip Pullman’s own obsession (and the reason he wrote the openly anti-Christian His Dark Materials series, as a take-that against Lewis).

Not coincidentally, the current run of the Doctor Who series has been heavily influenced, via its Dawkins-fan executive producer, Russell T. Davies,* by the Pullman novels — especially in the heavy use of the deus ex machina to keep the plot moving. Then again, Doctor Who wouldn’t be anywhere without said literary device — the actor playing the lead wants to quit the show? Then we’ll just pull a previously unmentioned alien body-changing magic trick out of the script’s ass! And so on — so maybe Mr. Pullman was just as influenced by the show which after all is a British institution, like tea and crumpets and warm beer and everyone owning an odd-looking small dog.

(*Note the quote at the link — “People were falling at his feet … We’ve had Kylie Minogue on that set, but it was Dawkins people were worshipping.” Insert your own ironic when-man-ceases-to-believe comment. I wonder, though, if he is worshipped by Who fans for his atheism or for the fact that he is married to Lalla Ward, who played the second Romana?)