Man Of The Year Review

The look cues the goofy music, but the face cues the inspirational music.

There's a part of our mind that is hardwired to believe that no matter how bad a film can be, the fact that one actor that we really like is there will at least make it worthwhile. This is a part of our mind that causes many DVDs to be purchased at a pharmacy or dollar store. It is also a part of our mind that allows us to become more informed of those we enjoy as entertainers, letting us know how talented they are as well as how their careers stand. Simply put, I watched Man Of The Year because of Robin Williams. Robin Williams is probably the most prominent comedian that resides in that "they can do no wrong" section of my conscience, next to George Carlin and Bill Murray. Robin Williams shares quite a lot of great factors with Jim Carrey. Both are filled to the brim with energy, can do well in serious roles and do some fantastic improv when given the chance. Their film careers on the other hand show a very different path. Carrey has made a considerable effort to avoid terrible roles (though that's not to say he hasn't gotten into some stinkers) and has mostly made a comfortable home in dramatic work. Unfortunately for Williams, he has had his hand in some harshly panned productions and switches from the two theater masks constantly (especially when you compare him to Carrey). So basically what I'm trying to say here is that I don't think Man Of The Year was a good film.

That's not to say that I didn't enjoy myself with the film, but it was a different kind of enjoyment that I get from a film that I don't consider good. Rather than being raucous and soaked in mockery of the very thing I was watching, it was mild and basic enough to at least consider it my money's worth. As satisfactory as that might be, this comes across as bizarre. For me to see a film that has Lewis Black, Robin Williams and Christopher Walken sharing the screen together along with being a political satire and the best thing going across my mind is "I guess I don't need to get my looney back" does not compute very well. It also doesn't help that I recalled more moments of laughter than I did awkward silence or aggressive criticism. It's almost as if my brain is well aware that there is more beyond these aspects but it doesn't want to dive further deeper into them. Instead, it just wants to accept it had a good time, in the same way that getting caught kissing your pillow isn't the most awkward thing to happen to the person that came in. But I'm not going to let my bias take hold, at least not in this case.

But what exactly is Man Of The Year about? At first thought, you imagine a film that revolves around TIME magazine's pick for the most important person on the planet. The one that makes the biggest change, engrained in the consciousness of many. By the title and the titular actor alone, I'd imagine Robin Williams playing a hobo who looks at the current Man of the Year's picture on a newsstand and decides that he will one day be on the magazine, later going on a series of wacky hijinks all the while learning about following your dreams and helping others. Y'know, the sort of saccharine schmultz that you can totally see him excelling in. The actual story isn't close, but it is noteworthy enough to be one hell of a cigar. Williams plays Tom Dobbs, a comedian who loves to rip on the American political system. Many people adore the guy, so much so that when he makes a joke about running for president, the audience cheers for him. Slowly but surely, support builds up and Tom figures that he might as well give it a shot. For his presidential campaign, he is backed up by his manager Jack Menken (Walken), and one of his greatest comedy writers Eddie Langston (Black), who notice that when he talks serious politics, he tends to not bring the same spark to him. The two of them suggest to Dobbs that in the presidential debate, he should be more of himself and bring the people what they want from him. At first, Dobbs takes reluctance to the idea, but eventually decides to make the event a complete farce by being brutally honest with his jokes. Due to his stunt, he becomes incredibly recognized in the public and on the night of the elections, he becomes the first comedian to be elected president.

To be fair, his had confetti and balloons.

As far as concepts go, that alone is scoring some major points. Not only is the idea of a comedian being elected a president able to showcase their abilities to outrageous degrees, but the material that you can suck out of it is plentiful that it could fill up it's own genre. Not only would have the reaction of the comedian realizing he's in high office, but also you'd have citizens who find themselves pissed off by being the laughingstock of the world and other countries looking at each other in utter confusion. It would be as ludicrous as a bus driver being the president because the last one's spirit came to him as a bird and told him he was the rightful successor. That alone would make it, and Man Of The Year does work with it. For one, Robin does what he does best, especially in the scene where he tears down the facades of the two other candidates. He plays paintball while the Secret Service is watching by, wears a George Washington wig and outfit when addressing Congress and even makes Saturday Night Live worth viewing. Of course there's also Lewis making his usual wisecracks and Christopher Walken has some of his patented moments thrown in for good measure. The thing is though that Man Of The Year isn't just about Dobbs and his crew painting the White House polka dots (which is one serious missed opportunity right there), it's also about elections being rigged.

Yes, in a Robin Williams comedy, there is a serious subplot involving an electronic voting system error. See, there's this woman who works for a company called Delacroy. Delacroy is in charge of the recent election and has already put the machines out. The woman finds out though that an error is causing the wrong person to be elected and immediately informs the company. Rather than fix it immediately as secretly as possible, the president decides to ignore it because if they try to correct it now, their stock will plummet and they want more money. Now, I will give it credit that the film having Dobbs not truly be elected into office is a good movie. Not only in the realistic aspect,  but because it gives him a conflict. No, the issue would moreso be that they try to create a villain out of this. It's the kind of weird that doesn't benefit the movie, because it's not working as a punchline. It doesn't even work as a bizarrely serious aspect either because it doesn't carry much poignancy to it. Some elections end up with the wrong results, but usually it involves another party trying to weasel their way to the top or lack of voter interest, not a company that wants their electronic system to be used in all the elections to reap a huge profit. It could possibly work if there was more depth to those characters, but needless to say there isn't much else to it. And it doesn't get any better I'm afraid.

Pictured above: Man Of The Year not getting any better

For starters, I consider myself a very ticklish person. By that I mean that practically anything makes me laugh. A well executed, incredibly sophisticated series of witty remarks could very much evoke the same amount of tear-jerking chuckles that a person falling down the stairs whilst farting as their body hits the next step. That makes it very hard for me to convince others that I don't like Seltzerberg films that I'm forced to watch, because they can still hear the ringing of my cackling from before, but I have the ability to recognize when what I laughed at was good comedy and when it was bad. In Man Of The Year, I'd have to say that for every hit, there was at least two misses. That wouldn't be too bad if the jokes were being fired at you from every corner, but you have to remember that satire does not automatically mean comedy. If it did, then reading 1984 at the Apollo theater would not be met with excessive booing. It's a shame because when it hits, it hits well. Robin Williams goes on and on in the political debate, he really was on fire. A lot of the comments, while simple when it comes to ripping on the system, had a genuine sense of cleverness, effort and good intentions. Furthermore, the comedy of the film was at least giving off the feeling that it was trying to say something beyond the goofy tones. It was blunt, but it was the kind of blunt that was trying to break down a wall. Like I said, there was that sense that it was pushing as hard as it could, and I have to commend it for doing the best it could. Especially considering that it was a political satire taking place smack dab in the middle of 2006, which focused much less on making fun of Dubya and more on critical issues that had been plaguing the system before and during the Bush administration.

Unfortunately though, as great as political satire can be and as much as I love it, it doesn't mean that it will be good. If I was convinced Man Of The Year was good, I would have compared it to Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert from the get-go. But when the jokes had soul they had no punch to them, and when they had a punch to them they had no soul. That political debate I was talking about earlier was a good example of this, because the good jokes weren't saying anything bold beyond "this system is screwed up". I know that the basis of political comedy revolves around that principle, but there's also always another matter tied to it, there's always something beyond that single point. At the very least it might say that a certain part of the system is screwed up or they say the same thing with a sillier comparison. It didn't take many chances either, since it constantly tried to restrict itself. Every actor that I mentioned gave it their half. They weren't showing signs of struggling, but you know that what you're seeing isn't them at their best. Lewis Black should have been clocking 100 swears in under a minute, Walken should have had more of his speech mannerisms coming through and Robin Williams should have been bouncing off the walls. To it's defense, maybe having all three go to their full selves might have made too much of a clutter, but a film trying to juggle comedy with a conspiracy drama isn't any neater, though I get to that later. Even with the chances it tries to take, it limits them substantially. There's more time spent on Dobbs taking his presidential campaign seriously than there is time where Dobbs is making fun of the way politics is being run. Rather than have Dobbs muck about in the White House and push some bold or insane legislation, he's mucking about as the President-Elect. Oh yeah, I forgot to clarify, he's not the president in the film, he's the president-elect. With that simple detail, buckets upon buckets of potential have been thrown down the drain, crippling what could have been an absolute masterpiece. This alone could have been the biggest sin that the film could have committed, but one thing makes it worse.

Remember that woman that I mentioned above? The one that I didn't even dignify with the name of the character or the actress? She's the love interest in the film. For a while I had found unnecessary love interests to be harmless for the most part. They were sometimes stupid, but they were the kind of stupid that I could at least laugh at. This one on the other hand was one that made my teeth grind so many times that I can bite into an apple like it was butter. It was bad enough that there was this film trying to be something it shouldn't have been, a drama. But then there had to be a romantic relationship. It was so incredibly pointless to the plot and it was awkwardly shoehorned to give it some semblance of heart. Which turned out to be like performing surgery on a healthy person and replacing the heart with a rock. She honestly did feel like a rock, just kind of there, and occasionally catching the attention of someone because she came right out of nowhere. There wasn't anything she really added, and on top of that, she wasn't good enough as an actress to pull me into anything she said. Worse off, it's because of her that the unnecessary drama came along to ruin a film that had one hell of a chance as a stupendous comedy. And it's not as if the drama was working well enough with the comedy that you could at the very least excuse the shift in tone, no, it felt like two different movies were being played, and not in the hilariously awkward way where they're on at the same time, more in the gratingly annoying way of one movie going on for a while, stopping and then the other one goes by.

"If I do a Bill Clinton impression, will that cheer you up?"

Man Of The Year is about as mixed a movie as you can get. It's wasted potential combined with half-hearted performances from big names that has a great deal of faults that somehow can find themselves to be overlooked by the mere fact that one has incredibly low expectations that are exceeded substantially. If you have a comedian becoming the president of the US because of an election error, you don't focus more of the film on the comedian accepting that they might not be the real president, you have the comedian engage in tons of shenanigans. Much less if you have Robin Williams as said comedian because you miss out on some hilarious opportunities...or at the very least a few cute gags revolving around some of the previous work he's done (I would have been set with Genie's face being chiseled into Mount Rushmore). With that said, it still could have worked as a comedy-drama, provided both of those sides be evenly dispersed or sewn together properly. And at times, that actually did occur and it worked pretty well. But when you look at the film from a distance, it can't hold itself without tipping over. It never falls and crashes, but it's not something that anyone wants to go near to either. To say I was disappointed would depend on the ways I saw it. As a film that I saw simply because it had an actor I liked, it did enough and maybe went a little beyond in my eyes. As a film that when stripped down to concepts and ideas that could have been played around with, there wasn't enough experimentation or energy as I would have hoped.

5 Commonly Used Tropes That I Don't Understand At All

Tropes are something. They're elements in a multitude of different medias that for one reason or another, have been able to spread out for long periods of times. They're factors that help to create the structure of a story and allow you to relate better to the material or give it a sense of logic. es, tropes are a vital part of this world, and it would be incredibly hard not to find something that falls under one of these ideas. But have you ever stopped to think about why the trope exists? Why is the anvil the most commonly dropped object on cartoons' heads? Why are ancient Egyptians usually the same color of skin when there are debates about what race they really are? Sure, a few searches may answer some of the questions, but you can still feel like it won't click with you the right way. You'll still be sitting there, watching the same sort of thing happen without comprehension. These tropes basically make me feel that way. Now, I want to make it clear that just because I don't understand these tropes, it doesn't mean that I'm necessarily against them. They just don't seem to click, that's all. Without further ado, let's get it started.

5. The nosebleed of arousal

There isn't many other places outside of Japanese entertainment where you see it, but it's still something that I feel should be said. The scenario goes that an incredibly attractive woman is near a dude and immediately the poor guy's leaking red from his nostrils. It doesn't matter if she was leading the guy on for some dirty business or if she merely crossed his path without her noticing, the blood immediately drips out. My first guess was that it might be a cultural aspect, much like how the ancient Egyptians believed that the heart was the brain. Perhaps the nose was a sexual organ and in order to show excitement, a bit of blood had to come out. But if that's the case, then why isn't there more women that have a nosebleed when a guy with a rockin' bod comes by? I rarely find the inverse occurring, and it's not like anime ladies are being deprived of sexy men. The only other option I could think of was that it was a means to sneak past censors and now has become a softer way to imply it. You know, like if you wanted to sneak a dirty joke, you make a kid nosebleed when he sees his hot teacher. That in mind, there's probably a lot more creative and clever ways that the animators can imply sexual undertones, and most of the nosebleeds I've seen usually take place in material that is not meant to be so family friendly. For all I know, it could just be a running gag with unknown origins that continues to be used just for the sake of it.

4. The owl is the wisest animal

I'm just gonna shoot this down right now, I know that the probable origins of this occurring stem from religion or mythology, but I still think it doesn't work. Okay, it does work, but that's more of a matter of the design taking a good deal of liberties to make the owl look wise, not the owl itself having much of a wise look to them. Owls can be a variety of different characters as far as I know. They can be quirky little buggers on account of their rotating heads and adorable bug-eyes. They can be pretentious bastards with their smug visage and bizarre walk. And they can be menacing creatures when they look upon you with a disgusted glare and let out their spine-tingling call. At best, the owl can look old, but it's never wise. I don't think to myself, "You know, that owl has probably seen some crazy shit". If anything, I usually think, "Man, that owl is doing some crazy shit." Personally, the turtle is a wiser animal to me. They're slow, sure, but they seem to be very aware of their surroundings, considering they can live up to 100 years. Considering that wisdom isn't necessarily relative to age, another pick would be the wolf. They might be more wild, but they carry themselves with a good amount of pride and balance their attributes accordingly. Maybe I'm not the best source for which animals embody which attributes. I mean I think moths are adorable and butterflies are harbingers of doom.

3. Aliens love high-culture

As far as we know, it is possible that there is other life out there. The chances of us meeting that life or understanding that life may be incredibly small right now, especially in our lifetime, but it is possible that those aliens might act similarly to us. It's also possible that these aliens might be smarter than us since we might believe that they could come to us with their UFOs or whatnot. Thanks to Star Trek, we also might believe that they will have more of an affinity towards literature like Shakespeare or Moliere. Far be it from me to trash talk this trope because I find the verbose extraterrestrial to be a very awesome trope. The thing is that what makes us so sure that the alien will look upon the work that we consider to be the cream of the crop and consider it valuable to us? It's very much possible that aliens might look upon the more common material to better understand humans than those a specific elite choose. I could imagine that later on they might decide to go with some high class work, but I don't think all of them would do it, especially from the get-go. Besides intelligence doesn't necessarily have to equate to having a good understanding of high culture. It could very much well be just culture itself. Not only that, but it's also possible that they're more the "point-and-shoot" kind of aliens. No harm in these sorts of speculations, as far as we know, we're all right and wrong about alien life.

2. The French are cowardly

Something tells me that at some point in time, the French were the laughingstock of the world, kind of like how the US is. Most of it consisted of them being snobby egotistical jerks or how much they loved Jerry Lewis. One of the widely used jabs that came along at the time must have been that those funky-smelling, beret-wearing baguette-eaters will run at the mere sight of trouble. Now, I'm not the king of France because I still have my head attached to my body, but I think that they can actually be pretty courageous. I'm going to assume that this stereotype had come around the second World War where Paris fell down faster than you could say Jean Luc-Godard. Considering that France at the time was a huge military power, they were probably expecting a little more of a fight. One has to remember that Germany was dominating with their blitzkriegs, catching a great deal of nations by surprise. And might I remind you that France was and still is one of the biggest names in war. They've fought in 168 wars, 109 of which they've won. Couple that with the fact that a lot of military words are derived from the French along with how incredibly ballsy some of the French are when it comes to doing things for the sake of art (Man On Wire proves my point significantly because anyone who has the balls to walk on a wire between the Twin Towers wins points for their nation) or when they're really upset. Hell, even when Vichy came along, the French weren't simply sitting on their asses heiling Hitler. Some of them went to fight with the resistance, which if you can tell, is a word derived from the French. That's gotta be something to at the very least recognize. I wouldn't be surprised if the main reason that American-French relations are tricky stem from the belittling of their successes. Or maybe it could be that whole Bush thing.

1.  Black people love watermelons

Look, I'm very much aware that this is an obvious pick, and I know I'm not the only one to point this out, but as far as stereotypes go, this is the most baffling for me. The other stereotypes, as offensive as they are, make some sense (though I think fried chicken is more universally loved rather than being a specific race's choice of cuisine). This on the other hand seems like a non-sequitur meant to offend someone. Granted, the French stereotype is probably equally as insulting, but at least you can say that the army doesn't reflect how the people themselves would act. With this, you're just throwing a random object, and trying to attribute it to a group of people with a negative connotation. Nothing really indicates to me that black people are incredibly fond of the fruit, and when I see it, it's usually done ironically to make fun of such a ludicrous stereotype. But much like I don't know much about the French, I can't be so certain that I know the black man's preference. Still, it will not make sense to me, nor will it ever make sense to me, no matter how hard you try. It might make me laugh, sure, but I'll only laugh because it's so random, not because I find that sort of racist humor particularly funny.

How About That Resolution?

I don't know if I should count this as one of the 52 (make that 51) that I promised I would do, but for the sake of convenience I will. And yes it is my convenience because a self-imposed goal has self-imposed rules that can be bent if self-imposed. This might change in the future if all of a sudden I'm writing like mad and I zip past the blog limit. Though if that were to happen, I suppose I would have a creative piece done as well. I guess it's better to just call this an update. This update is to inform you on a few matters. Mainly that since I'm writing for other places and I'm creating some more "original" content on those sites, in a way I'm fulfilling the amount of blogs I want to make, but just not doing it here. The idea is that I have 52 or more entries that I consider worthy of calling an entry. You can see why I would be skeptical of calling this one an entry. The other thing is that I have life to attend to. Now, I haven't been bugged around by life too much. It'll occasionally tap my shoulder and ask me for something, and I'll do it, but it won't hassle me. Life this time though is deciding to drag me by the hairs and do things. Coupled with previous issues that I've said have restricted the number of blogs on here, I'm basically in a worse situation than I was before. It's making me think that making this resolution was a factor of bad timing. While it may seem that way, I think the best way to look at it is that the start of the year will be slow, but the train will come chugging forward at full speed later on. That's hoping it still wants to chug. I still want to do this resolution and I want to make sure I have content enough to satisfy you as a reader and to satisfy myself. Plus, I figure I should go through with it.

...

Boy, this seems a bit short for a blog entry. I might as well think of something to do...OH! Since I know that you guys would be willing to help me on my quest to accomplish my resolution, would you be willing to ask me anything and have me answer it for kicks? Wait, no, this isn't Tumblr. Plus, asking for questions is usually a sign that you're incredibly bored...shit, what else could I do...uh...here's a few pictures I made over the years.

Blacula's Charm

Blackfaisier

Kornheiser News 1

Kornheiser News 2

Kornheiser News 3 (Or Faux News As Usual)

C+A+DUCKFACE

Okay...that's a few things I got to keep you going. I guess I can also show you this cover for a story. Considering everything I've just told you I'm not sure when it'll come out, but I have ideas for it. Yes I do.

Quick Flicks: Some Brief Words On Films I've Seen

I got a list of movies I've seen and I got thoughts on them.

POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD

The Wolf Of Wall Street (Quarter-Billions And Quailoods) 

I don't know how he keeps his suit so clean and organized with all that cocaine in his system.

I haven't seen many films, so if I call this the best movie of 2013, I'm probably undermining a lot of great work that came out this year like Gravity and 12 Years A Slave. The only other film I recall seeing that came out in 2013 was The World's End, and while I liked it, The Wolf Of Wall Street did something to me that immediately made me realize it was the better pick. This film shook me. It got into my head and it struck a cord with me. It made me want to ask my sister how she felt about it and elaborate on why she didn't like it. Even though I found myself understanding her view and agreeing with it, even though I felt that if I liked this movie, I would be a hypocrite for denouncing other films that have handled with similar matters and possibly stirring the same emotions, this was still my top favorite. While I can't consider it the absolute best of the year and neither can I even say that it's the best thing Martin Scorsese has done, it still is a great film in its own right. It certainly is another one of those "white collar crime" films which starts and ends the ways you expect it to, but what really takes it to a level that is beyond those films is the racy content. If you think the trailers were raunchy, you haven't even gotten a tenth of the kind of acts that occur in this movie. 

The debauchery in this film is beyond most films that involve a party-hungry rich prick, taking it to a level that could very well desensitize an innocent mind. This (seemingly) has it's down-side since it will make people think it's simple sensational tripe. "Oh look at these people, making the wild rich life so exciting and racy. How dare they think that us middle-class folk can't have the same amount of fun". Hell, I even thought of that. The film tricks you into forgetting the necessary cliche for a while. As you still watch it, thinking that all The Wolf Of Wall Street is doing is making you feel bad about not being rich, all the sordid fun that occurs starts to become too much. The glamour is lost...instead what resonates is this feeling of disgust. You aren't disgusted by the act of having a crazy party, you're disgusted by the act of having a crazy party every day. "White collar crime" films often drive this point of how greed can mess with a man, but The Wolf Of Wall Street takes this point and fills it with as many hookers and drugs it can fit on the screen. The overload of such content does cause cracks in the film and it certainly highlights the simplicity of the characters, but the comedy that comes out of the situations and just how hard this movie hits you with its twisted nature does its best to patch them up. If you don't like this film because it's too much sex and drugs, I won't hold it against you. If you think there are much better movies that handle similar ideas in this film, I'm sure I could think of a few that do. But this film, at the very least, is going to take your mind and throw it around, leaving it in places you didn't think you'd end up.

Planes, Trains And Automobiles (Most Realistic Depiction Of Airline Travel '68)

hawt twink-on-bear action xxx

Moving on to lighter territory, this was a film that helped me get better acquainted with the brilliance of late 60s, early-to-mid 70s comedy. In a way, the movie really benefits from also having Steve Martin be in the film. Why? Well, Steven Martin is one of the comedians who seemed to thrive in that era and I find his comedy to be very hit-or-miss. It's not so much to cheesy factor that throws me off more than the awkward way the delivery happens or the shaky pay-off. One movie that really showed this to me was The Jerk, a film that was on par with Beverly Hills Cop as the most average and weirdly paced comedies out there. The Producers wasn't much of a help, but we'll get to that later. I needed to see more of what made him a better comedian and what worked for comedy in that period of time, and I figured that Planes, Trains And Automobiles would do the trick because it was written by John Hudges, who still has a place as a great screenwriter. Turns out, I was goddamn right.

There have been many comedies that take the "ultimate misery" approach and it varies to degrees. I'd have to say that so far this is the one to look at for the best example of it done right. It takes the scenario to the right places so that it both hilarious and touching. John Candy, another great talent, works so well bouncing his energy off of the straight man attitude of Steve Martin. While some can consider the straight man to be a simple comedic element, Steve realizes the breaking points and uses them when necessary to create the response of a man who's become exhausted and enraged of everything falling down over him. Candy's quirks are hilarious, Martin trying to maintain sanity is done great and when the movie manages to slow down and have a serious, heart-felt moment, it's pulled off with a great sense of timing and finesse. It's oddly quite a feel-good movie even if what happens sounds like a complete nightmare to endure. The feeling that at the very least you're still alive to tell such a tale and return to a place of comfort in the end is certainly a sweet one, and this movie creates that atmosphere in the best way it can. 

The Breakfast Club (Emilio Estevez Was Andy Clark?)

I'm sure people relate to Bender the most on some level. Probably psychopathic...

It's fitting that I would segue from one Jon Hughes movie to another. The Breakfast Club is often considered a classic film by practically everyone and after watching it, it's pretty easy to see why that is. If there was something that this film really understood was the way that teenagers who don't truly believe in the cliques they're under feel about school. It shows how they are self-aware of their status and how they don't feel like they should be tied down to it simply because that's what school dictates. At the same time, it shows that there's not much choice that these kids have in terms of breaking from the constructs of school. The only thing the film missed is the feeling that even though you've seen examples of people not abiding to the stereotypes that were set on them, one must still continue to have those stereotypes in order to avoid being made a fool of in school. Though that could be something only a select group of people feel in school. Still, this film is timeless in the way that it reflects the minds of high-schoolers in the midst of their lives, and it allows you to either sympathize or relate to the the main five in the midst of detention. 

Zodiac (Why Do I Want To Watch Se7en Now?)

"This case better not hinge on what is tacked on to a bulletin board..."

I've been interested in this film for a while. The thing is that my interest wasn't all consuming, it didn't really motivate me enough to actively seek it. Though now that I've watched it, I feel like doing that wouldn't have been such a bad idea. It's quite an interesting thriller in the way that it handles it's pace. It's not too slow, but it's not too fast either. Usually it's one or the other, but I'm glad it made sure that it could capture the right speed. It just makes it easier to attract an audience. Though I will admit, the length of the film did kind of distract me, but it didn't drag despite it's length. If it did though, then I got distracted by Downey Jr. or Mark Ruffalo doing what they does best (which is either spouting sardonic quips or being a no-nonsense law-abiding tough-guy).  While some of the character development felt kind of empty, but it more than made up for it with the main character. 

See, when Downey Jr. or Ruffalo are on screen, they carry the film with one arm, which is fine, but it'll slip a bit out of their grasp. Gyllenhaal, meanwhile, will catch the film when it slips and hold it above his head. You see a lot more with how Gyllenhaal acts in the movie, and it's gripping to see just how further he slides as the case keeps getting more and more tangled. I read that there were people who complain it didn't have enough action, but I don't think it requires it. The film is about solving a cryptic series of crimes, and to properly have that feeling, you can't be blasting your guns all over the place. Or if you can, you have to be a little more far-fetched, which isn't what this film is. Zodiac is meant to be grounded by the reality of how time-consuming and stressful the case it's based on, and when it absorbs itself fully in that reality, it creates the mood for a mystery that draws its viewer in with each passing second. 

The Producers (The Thumbs Aren't Agreeing)

Zero Mostel: Long lost cousin of Rodney Dangerfield

Before I carry on with this, I just want to say that the Ulla gag must have been made up because the woman slept with Brooks and he said "Well, I gotta make some joke so that she can be in the film." Though I think it's funnier to think that he was tied to the bed and she was forcing him to think of something. That out of the way, this film must be a sign that I'm not as old-fashioned as my adolescence-and-modern-culture-hating side of me wants me to think I am. Indeed, I have had many a time where I've thought back to more vintage works and imagined myself having a ball in that time period. Then again, I think it was better that I wasn't in the 20s in the US because I would have almost ended up dead, so I suppose there has to be something that these modern times can bring. It's perhaps one hell of a hyperbole to say that The Producers is akin to racism and the worst financial crisis the world's ever faced, but it certainly reeks of it's time period.  There's nothing wrong with a film having elements that draw from the time that it was made, and The Producers certainly uses the factors properly at times. With the political incorrect nature, the over-the-top performances and even a dash of hippies, it certainly has me laughing at time. Other times though, the editing style turns me away and the gags sometimes end up falling flat either by the execution or the pay-off. By no means do I think the actors failed, they did their best, especially Gene Wilder and Zero Mostel. The writing, on the other hand, might have caused a few issues. Though, I feel that perhaps it could be a matter of a generational gap. I don't love this film, but I can't hate it. Because honestly, who can hate a film with an extravagant musical number of Hitler? 

Blade Runner (The Golden Ford Years)

Those eyes are quite something, I'll tell you what.

The state of sci-fi nowadays is a great enigma to me. I'm not sure if it's still doing well or if it's along the same ride of mediocrity that other genres nowadays seem to be on. Then again, I figure it has always been on that ride. Sci-fi can be a very creative genre, but the amount of thought that is needed for a project is usually difficult. You never know if you need more time or less, and because of that, it becomes more of a toss-up whether it'll work or not. Still, in the wave of sci-fi, certain oysters will wash ashore and bring forth the great pearls to admire and take note of. Blade Runner is most befitting to this, as it works not only as a sci-fi movie, but as a film noir as well. And, strangely enough, both of them need each other for this to be considered one of the best films out there, period. 

Without the sci-fi aspect, the film's ambiguity isn't set up right, which in turn makes the grey area seem less like an interesting aesthetic and more a display of sloppy writing. Without the noir aspect, the film would be a generic action film with a few nifty set-pieces thrown in for fun. They're so essential to helping each other out, that it manages to lay out elements for other films that want to combine the two genres and make a great film to boot. It's also very heart-warming despite it's gritty tones, and oddly enough, it doesn't come off as weird. The soundtrack and characters give way to show that there might be something beyond the mess that is the city. It's made stronger that the characters who give more way to that warmth are robots since the actors' performances are able to demonstrate the conflict of impulse vs reason that humans face while also showing that they are pieces of technology at their core. It's also the obvious ironic factor, but I believe the way the performance is pulled also helps it. Blade Runner is simply something someone has to see, because it really reflects how the world can be at times. A place filled with nonsense that occasionally comes by and touches you, whether you want it to or not. 

Paprika (I Don't Have A Witty Remark, I Was Too Busy Admiring The Animation)

All that we're missing here is a giant octopus, marshmellow people and a Miku-faced pizza.

It's perhaps an obvious reason nowadays as to why I was interested in Paprika. I heard someone compare it to Inception and I had to see why the two would be in the same sentence together. After watching Paprika, I feel that the best way to describe the two is that they're same brand of car, but they're going different routes. While they involve entering other people's dreams, creative action sequences and a plot that is seemingly confusing but actually a lot more basic, they take the concepts to different places. Inception focused more on implanting an idea into someone's head and centers around the issue the main character has which tampers with their mission. Paprika, instead, focuses more on the minds of various characters and delves into the idea of dreams reflecting our inner thoughts. Even though I've pointed out basic differences and could go into greater detail into why these two are sort of like apples and oranges to one another, if I had to recommend one of them over the other, I'd have to say that Paprika is the better film. It just took more advantage of it's concept. 

For every issue I had with Inception, Paprika had it figured out. Inception never really felt like it was a dream. It was sort of basic in its surrealism. I imagine that there was probably more in store but budget wouldn't allow it, but I still feel like there were ways they could have made it more dream-like. It may be cheating to say that Paprika did better in this front by allowing the imagination of the creators flow better since it's animation, but damn it, it did feel like I was in someone's dream! Inception tries to trick you into thinking there's a lot more going on when there isn't. I wouldn't mind that if the movie is good (which it is to some degree), but with the hype this movie gets for being "deep", especially at the time that I watched it, this has become a lot more of an annoyance. The weird thing about that is that I think I mixed up the way I was supposed to approach these movies. Inception was supposed to be the one I just had mindless fun with and Paprika was the one that I had to think more about. It may not be a lot, but Paprika has enough set-pieces and pieces of dialogue that make you think beyond all the pretty colors. You're still having a lot of fun while you're on the ride, but a while later, you'll think back to a previous scene and wonder what hidden symbolism lied there. It's basically the film version of a Sudoku. Simple at first, thought-provoking later on, enjoyable all around. 

Ghostbusters (Bill Murray Can Do No Wrong)

"You know what we're missing? A cool black guy."

I find it a bit weird that I'm talking about Ghostbusters around this time. It's not that it makes me feel old, it's just that the new year doesn't seem to go hand in hand with the comedic hijinks of a couple of paranormal investigators. It seems kind of futile to talk about Ghostbusters since everyone's watched it and given their own reasons to like it via the quotes. Really, there isn't much I can't say that is both positive and unique about the film. The Ghostbusters themselves are really hilarious, the effects are simply stunning, the comedy is spot-on and it's an all around fun ride. I could just finish with this, but somehow I feel like I can't. It's not because I feel obliged to regurgitate more of the praise that this film got. Rather, I feel like after I watched the movie, something seemed missing. I feel that, by watching this movie at an older age, I lose that experience I used to have with other movies. As funny as it is, a nostalgia factor greatly enhances an experience, both in positive ways and negative ones. The experience of seeing something that you liked before still being good is a great feeling, and it's made even better when there are jokes that you now understand and giggle at. By no means does that change my thoughts on the film, but I feel like it would have been nice to have had that with Ghostbusters. Maybe if I wait 20 years, I just might. 

Lost In Translation (Or "How Can I Hate A Movie That Starts With Scarlett Johansson's Ass?")

Hey, it could be worse...you could be in North Korea.

Whenever I think to myself, "what's a movie that I was disappointed by?", it takes me a while to come up with something. Even then, it feels like I'm not being true to myself. "Yeah, I didn't like this film," I think out-loud because I forgot that I can do that in my head, "but I didn't really come with many expectations so why would I be disappointed?". I suppose I took some bliss in that, feeling that I knew when a movie would suck or not building myself enough for a lackluster payoff. And along with that, I think some otherworldly force got tired of my inner smugness in this factor and threw in Lost In Translation to make me understand that feeling. I didn't want to hate this, because I love the two main actors and I love the cinematography. The setting seemed to work really well and the concept, while simple, is able to work. The harder I tried, the more faults I saw. Even though I loved the shots, they would drag on. While I don't try to get so pent up over long shots because of how that's supposed to create "atmosphere", it just felt like they hammered in that we're in a country where the two main characters find themselves unable to understand anything. 

While we're on the subject of things I love, why did they reduce Scarlett Johansson's dialogue to mostly giggling? It cheapens her role as a young character who's finding herself in a grey part of life. It shouldn't distract me, but it just took me out of the depth she had when she kept chuckling. Still, when I could put that aside, she did play the role quite well, and her chemistry with Bill Murray is...erm...FUCK! Alright, so I found the chemistry between her and Murray to be awkward...as a viewer. For a while I thought to myself, "Maybe they're trying to trick us with our initial perceptions of their relationship and instead having them end up like a father and a daughter." It makes sense, they seem so close to each other by the get go, she has little issue going out with him, she finds him to be a person of comfort and he pretty much cracks jokes in the same vein a silly dad would. That is until there's a few things that indicate that their relationship is meant to be more straight. So unless this film is written by an incest enthusiast, then they screwed up. 

The romantic conflicts the characters face also cause problems because you don't feel the conflict. In a work that involves a character already married being with another character who they've taken fancy to, a cornerstone of making it good is creating the tension in the character to go with this new character or stay to their old flame. With Scarlett Johansson's husband, the love is phoned in, while with Bill Murray's wife, you're surprised they haven't divorced yet. Both of their significant others remind me of Inez in Midnight In Paris, in that there is not only disinterest in the partner, but also greater interest in something that causes them to further distance themselves from their partner. Where as Midnight In Paris gave me a romantic environment, a role that Owen Wilson was not only good at but even had some depth to, Lost In Translation only gives me two great actors who's performances are damaged by the writing, editing and overall directors. Trust me, I wanted to love this movie with all my heart, but I can't bring myself to it.

The New Year's Resolution For This Blog

So we begin with a new year and I gotta say, that's good because I need to have something that can refresh this whole damn thing. See, I know that I haven't been able to make as many blogs as I wanted to in the year. I also know that there's things that you guys are in the dark about. And by you guys I mostly mean Dark Side because I think he's the only dedicated reader of the crap that I post here. So why do I lay out the program better now that the year has started.

First, a re-introduction. I'm DryChris. Amateur VA, actor, dice collector, writer, etc. I run this blog by myself I just post the things that I can, when I can. Lately I've been more active in places like Twitter (@GameJudgeTPS) and Tumblr (The Desk Of DryChris), though I also write for Teh Pwn Shop (http://www.tehpwnshop.com/) and I have a Wattpad (http://www.wattpad.com/user/TheDamnedNinja) for more creative works . I used to write for a site called Screwattack, but then I faded out of there, and I guess that came at the cost of alienating myself from a lot of cool folks who I used to write with. Then again, I did a shit job of really communicating with other people since I seemed to jump from site to site, making whatever acquiantances I could and getting swept up in thoughts, sites, and all other kinds of shit. I mainly did that because I much rather write in a better environment, and one that wasn't too limited. Screwattack was a gaming site, and I didn't always write about games. They had their successes, sure, but it felt better to make my own blog, hence this is why this is here. I don't really know my audience, and I'd certainly like to know who else is reading instead of guessing, but what can I do?

I forgot to mention that I fuck around Photoshop. A lot.

This blog has a very few amount of entries, I'm aware of that. Last year was the most active and even then it was just by one extra. Among those entries are things I'm proud of, and other things that I'm not. Hell, there's a few of those posts that were also posted on TPS, Screwattack, and Destructoid (along with another site). So for the most part this is kind of a collection of my writing work with the rare blog that is simply intended for this one and this one only. Among those posts is my most viewed blog entry which seems to be this one because I guess I struck a cord with other film noir enthusiasts.

I can talk more about the blog's history, but I want to get down to brass tacks and talk about its future. See, something that peeves me in general is that I have a lot in my mind, but it doesn't show at times that I do. Obviously it's because I have real life to attend to, but it's also a combination of procrastination, crashing from putting too much in my mind and most of all, motivation. Now I know I can't get it by begging people to look at my work, that shit doesn't fly. What I can do is maybe set a little goal of my own for the new year. And that goal is this.

By the end of 2014, I will have made a minimum of 52 blogs that are either reviews, interviews or miscellaneous pieces that delve into some topic.

That should be about one for each week of the year. It's certainly nothing as groundbreaking as the amount of blogs posted by a single person in other venues, but keep in mind that I've got life to deal with. That and I might have a story idea that goes to Wattpad. Or if the stars allign properly, I might have a video that goes to my Youtube channel (GameJudge). I'd rather try to aim for that minimum than try to go any more overboard. Also, some of the new ones might be on TPS and somewhere else, which might make this cheating, but I consider it "getting my work out there." As for length, I'll just try to make it a decent length so that it counts, but if I post something short, I won't count it. That will at least be good enough to keep this place relevant. This one doesn't count at all, of course, unless I make the limit 53 and say that I have 52 left. Some months you might get more posts, some you might get less, maybe you might not get anything at all. But my goal is simply to hit 52, not do one each week.

I don't know about the far future, but here's what you can expect sometime soon:

• A quick little blurb about movies I've seen recently
• A long overdue entry
• A two-parter list (which I'll count as one blog)
• A topic piece

That's all I got for now, so happy new year to you all and I hope you enjoy yourself! If you want to say anything to me, feel free to do it on my Twitter, Tumblr or even here. I'd love to hear anything that you feel about this. 

I certainly will need it.

Top 6 Albums Of 2013

2013 was certainly a weird year for me in terms of music. More and more I grew distant from the more "mainstream" crowd, but I didn't necessarily sink into the Bandcamp scene as well as I probably should have in the year. To be fair, I've mostly stuck around Breakbit, since it is my favorite place to go to for music. Even then, I suppose I don't truly represent what other Breakbit fans enjoy, so this list doesn't really represent a certain category of music enthuthiasts. No, rather, this list is simply what I enjoyed listening to the most from what I could get in the year. Without further ado, here's my picks in no particular order.

DR777's REAL

DR777 has constantly proved himself to be the most idiosyncratic among the most bizarre and experimental electronic music makers, and REAL is no exception. Here, he has managed to strengthen his sound, which is a weird combination of gritty hip-hop beats combined with relaxing sources. All the music sounds like they've been jolted with extra energy, as it progresses with a great sense of rhythm and style. You feel yourself moving to and fro' with each song, particularly the ones that have a calm opening. His choice of sources and the way he mangles with them is still as unique as ever, especially in songs like Real, Drop and Son. They just ooze with that feeling of being caught between having a good time and finding yourself stuck in a dream that's being controlled by someone else. This is probably the best album out there for people who want a YTP experience without those pesky visuals.

Vaervaf's Legshells

If there is one thing that I know for certain about Vaervaf is that he is nothing like I've ever seen before. His music certainly reflects that since it defies any sort of structure that one would expect from music. To say that Vaervaf is a Dadaist musician would both be accurate and completely crazy. For one, I'm not sure if one can really take his work so seriously to call it a subversion of standard music. And two, his music is not filled with hate against the medium. Rather, it is something that resembles a cult, lulling you into a sense of comfort, but also reaching itself under your skin. It is filled with love, but it's the kind of love that a victim gets for their captor once they've been with them for so long. The songs have an ability to possess you with it's violent glitch-like noises and it's soothing breaks that slowly slip into a cacophany of utter confusion. Also, the vocals just add to the cryptic nature that makes this such a fascinating listen. This album is simply a great example of the dissonance one feels when they see a work that makes no sense at all, yet manage to understand it with a great sense of depth.

Glue70's Points Of Interest

As I've said before, I owe a lot to glue70 when it comes to my tastes of music. What I failed to mention was that I also owe him a great deal of thanks for being something that I can look to when I feel as though I've lost faith in music. Points Of Interest shows me just how much passion can go into a single album, and just how much love a person can have for their craft. You can sense it in songs like Casin, Highway Broken and Quiet Mary Talking as they flow by with pinpoint accuracy. They simply sound like glue70 took his time to put all the pieces together properly. It's magnificent how he manages to combine older techniques with a newer flow, creating his own take on retro electronic music. The best part about this album is its simplicity. It's not trying to do anything extremely complicated, it is simply a well-made work that one can sit back and enjoy. With that, it succeeds because it doesn't distract itself and it strives to do its damn best to achieve its goal.

Eddache's Only Man

Now, this is an artist that I'm not really aware of...well not as much the previous three. I didn't really know what to think of this album considering Eddache's other works. On the one hand, it had promise since Bioshock is brimming with atmosphere. On the other, Eddache's mostly been associated with a more "upbeat" sort of attitude, especially considering what he works on. With that said, this album really does a great deal of justice to the game. He picks the right audio clips and the right times to play them, setting the mood properly. Masterpiece for example, shows the broken mind of Sander Cohen as well as his elaborate showmanship. The Bloody King is another great one, as it perfectly sums up the tour de force that is Andrew Ryan. The manipulation of the music is simply sublime, not only accentuating the emotions but also being able to create something of his own. Like glue70, it's a very basic concept, but the execution is done so well, it's a treat to hear.

chris†††'s frasierwave / Saint Pepsi's WORLD TOUR

Frasierwave and WORLD TOUR are a great summary of how my musical tastes were in 2013. That is to say, this was the year that I caught onto this movement called "vaporwave". I don't know why I got to this so late, but I'm glad it's still trucking through. It was incredibly hard to pick one or the other, so I decided to pick both of them because they captured different sides of the movement really well. I got into frasierwave earlier in the year, and I absolutely enjoyed chris†††'s style of glitchy edits and how he created an unreal setting with sources using such simple moves. It felt like there was something beyond the twisting of the music, something hidden, but I was too overwhelmed with the thoughts that came up that I ended up frozen, simply taking the work as if it were some elaborate painting. It really did feel like I was sitting in a nice, well-furbished psychologist's office with schizophrenia as the radio crooned by, with the development of the sound mirroring the analysis of one's psyche. Where frasierwave was more artistic, WORLD TOUR was able to feel more...I guess "mainstream". That is to say that it was more fitting to have this play for a crowd. SAINT PEPSI is able to make the elements of vaporwave work really well in a dance setting. Sometimes it feels like it's a new type of disco, since he's able to make the song bounce with the same groove. Other times, the slow and dragged out feeling of the music makes it play out like a modern slow dance. Both of them are two wonderful albums from two wonderful artists, and I thank them for introducing me to vaporwave.

An Interview With Jacob D. Seslek By Andrew Nonimus

(Artist's rendition of a man who looks similar to Jacob D. Seslek)

Good day, ladies and gentlemen. I am here today to talk to you about one of literary's greatest belated underground achievements. As you are aware about, Jacob D. Seslek was rushed to the hospital after having a heart-attack and died shortly afterwards. Seslek was known for having tenacity in the writing world, having 15 novels under his belt along with 20 collections of short shories, ranging from 15 to 30 per collection. His topics were usually varied such as his science-fiction western piece Forty Soldiers In Saturn, his satirical horror short series Cthulhu In Congress and his steampunk quantum picaresque antinovel Ticking Sideways In Paris. Since then, his most recent book The Man Who Shot Himself Backwards has been receiving countless accolades, being named "a new modern classic", and is currently being created into a movie starring Nicholas Kim Coppola as the lead protagonist. After reading over his acclaimed masterpiece for the seventh time, I remembered that I had met with the man for an interview. In fact, I was one of the only few, if not the only interviewer that managed to talk to him before he passed away. For your consideration, I give you an interview with Jacob D. Seslek.

Thank you for being able to talk to me on such short notice.

Huh? Who the hell are you?

I'm here to interview you, Mr. Seslek.

What, right here? Don't you think that's a bit stupid?

Now, now, I'm the one who supposed to be asking you the questions.

I get that, but can't this wait?

I feel that it would be better for the both of us if we did it right now.

Ugh, fine. Waiter, get my friend here the cheapest thing on the menu and a glass of tap water.

You sure know how to treat your guests.

You're lucky that I could even afford that, buster.

So, please tell me a little about yourself.

Well, alright. I was born in Oxnard, California on August 2, 1966.

Ah, you have the same date as James Baldwin and the year of J. J Abrams. Interesting how both seem to have some influence in your work.

I don't know much about either one of them, but okay. I grew up in a suburb, knew a lot of the people around the area. My best friends were Roderigo and Jerome, we played a lot of basketball and eventually played a little bit of NES when we were older. I had a few girlfriends in high school but nothing really stable. My parents were your typical sort, you know, kind but a pain in the ass when they needed to be. My old man would sometimes be a bit more of a pain, but without him I wouldn't be where I am now.

Fascinating. Did your father's abuse factor into when you wrote about the first boss of the protagonist in The Man Who Shot Himself Backwards who would belittle him but eventually give him a substantial paycheck at the end of each week?

Not really, but now that you mention it, I guess so. There's not much else to that piece of sh-

What about when you spoke about the challenges that races had to face with breaking through society's stigmas, particularly with the friends of the protagonist struggling so hard to achieve their goals?

My friends just had a little trouble with their goals. Roderigo really wanted to get good grades, and Jerome wanted to work with the community. I don't see what so crazy about that.

How about the impact that one of the love interests has on the protagonist, sending him into a spiral of excessive consumerism when he ultimately fails to be with her? I particularly liked the line "he felt as if all that was left was a hollow chamber filled with cold pieces that shattered when he held onto them" before he descends into madness.

Uh...you mean when he had to restock his fridge after he broke up with her? I was just talking about ice in that scene.

When did you start writing?

I was doing that since I was in 9th grade. I really grew to be fascinated by all those authors, from Bradbury to Fitzgerald, so I went along with it. Sure as hell was better than anything else that I had in mind...at least that's what I like to thin-

Is that the reason that The Man Who Shot Himself Backwards came to be, as a statement of resentment over a corporate position?

What? No! Having a desk job is aw-

Awful, I know. It's so powerful how you portray such a message, particularly with the protagonist waking up in a bed soaked by whiskey, turning the alarm away as he catches a faint reflection of what he's become.

You...you do know that he was hosting a party and someone spilled it on there? Plus, anyone waking up after such a crazy night isn't gonna have fun listening to that alarm.

Then how do you explain the reflection?

Someone drew dicks on his face, that's not something you want to stare at.

Wasn't that supposed to signify his possible bisexual nature?

How in the world did you come up with such a conclusion?!

The way the protagonist talks to his African-American friend alludes to this a lot

He saves the guy's life! Maybe it's a bit too much, but you treat the guy that does this with a shitload of respect. There is nothing else to it!

Isn't that counter-intuitive to your progressive message of the inclusion of the world and breaking away from the norm? Or were you using such an approach to deliver an inverted message as biting satire?

Oh god, the fucking book is just about a guy who has a few bad days working at a cubicle! We all have shitty work weeks!

Why do you hold such an aggressive attitude with the public?

Are you being serious right now? You think I'm fucking J.D Salinger here?

Well, clearly you must have it if you're treating me with such scorn.

I'm treating you with such scorn because you're wasting my time about a book I wrote so I could pay my goddamn rent. I spent two, maybe three weeks shitting this out, whilst the rest of my work ends up in the back of libraries. Where's any discussion about Silent Segregations,  a book dealing with urban racism? How about a little praise for the stories in Clutter In Blotters where I spent months making sense of trips I had on LSD. Or about The Fist With An Eye, the epic where people are stuck in modern retellings of Mayan myths? Do you know how much fucking research I had to connect Xbalanque to a man who watches CCTV? No, of course not. But you know what, I wouldn't mind that so much if you at least got what The Man Who Shot Himself Backwards was really about.

You mean to tell me that there is an alternate interpretation of a story you wrote?

Goddamn it, it was about striving forward, even if shit looks bad. At first I called the book that because it was cool, but then when I wrote the end, it made sense. Instead of the gun killing him, it just threw him back to the wall. And when he is knocked back, he sees his tie and sighs, looking to the ceiling, realizing that eventually it would be all right. Sure, his acts almost got him fired, but he still had good times and he recognizes that.

I thought that scene was him finding how inevitable it was for him to escape a career he hated and having to eventually march for-

Shut up! Look, I don't know why you came here, but I hope that neither you nor The Man Who Shot Himself Backwards become household names.

(This interview was conducted by the Pulitzer-Prize winning literary critic, Andrew Nonimus)