More commercials and products which... bother me.

Dear DSW (Department Shoe Warehouse): Congratulations, you have achieved the seemingly-impossible in your commercials. You have actually made me want to punch shoes in the face. Namely, shoes that show up and sing Christmas songs to you, insulting your choice of gifts. Now, as of this writing, I have yet to have any shoes do this to me, so it’s unclear as to whether this reflex will apply to ANY talking shoe, or only the boorish and rude ones. I will let you know, but until then, all shoes would do well to watch what they say around me.

Dear “Erectile Dysfunction” medication companies: please stop using side-effects disclaimers as thinly-veiled attempts at bragging. Be honest. You know the whole “if it lasts for more than 4 hours” thing wouldn’t have been mentioned unless it actually happened at some point, probably to one of you who came up with the list of side effects. Be honest, drug company, you know if this happens to you, the first call you make will NOT be to your doctor. It’s going to be to one of your old college buddies, to say, “Dude, guess what I’m looking at right now.” You know, the same guys who team up in the Flomaxx commercials. Even worse, if you’re Brett Favre, you’ll just snap a picture and send it to all of the power dancers on your contact list. Please, drug companies… just stop. We don’t want to hear about your four hour escapades, we don't want to hear about your hearing or vision problems, and we still don’t want to see your creepy side-by-side bathtubs on the beach… or in a forest… or skiing down the side of K2. Okay, well, maybe I wouldn’t mind seeing THAT.

Dear Texas Bay Area Credit Union: I do not employ your services, however, I implore you… please make that lady in your commercial stop dancing. Or whatever it is that she’s doing. I mean, I get that she’s supposed to be acting “excited” that she just won $10,000. I have never won that much money, but it would likely make me leap up, scream, and run from the room. Or, as Cousin Eddie from National Lampoon's would say, piss my pants and forget who I am for a half-hour or so. But not that. Whenever I win something, it has never made me want to stand in one place, turn slowly from side to side, and pump my fists up and down like I’m doing some bizarre cross between the Mashed Potato and the Twist. Or, for my readers younger than 30, like a cross between the Soulja Boy and the Running Man. Or, for readers younger than 15, a cross between Tinky Winky and Barney.

Finally, Dear “waterless hand sanitizer” industry: please come up with a better nozzle. As it stands right now, a small amount of your product remains in the nozzle, and over time will dry into a semi-solid GermX booger. The existence of such a thing is not the only problem – and don’t get me wrong, that’s DEFINITELY a problem by itself. However, the bigger issue comes in when I press the nozzle down, and because of the partially blocked opening, the liquid actually shoots OVER my hand, like a gout of water from a fire hydrant, dousing things on my desk instead of landing on my hand where it belongs. Let me give you a brief mini-focus group on your target audience. We want to clean our hands. We do not want to clean our desktops, our hair, or our left eyeball. Would it be too much to ask you to give us a nozzle that points straight down, instead of straight out like a garden hose just waiting to spray the overly-exuberant dogs on the front lawn? I mean really? Because I’m getting just slightly tired of simply wanting to disinfect my hands after using a child’s keyboard, and ending up looking like I just had a hook-and-ladder truck clean a spilled chalupa off the front of my shirt.

Until next time!

Something Columbus can do with the horse he rode in on....

This week is a bit of a departure for me. There will be some humor, sure, but I wanted to address something serious, in my own way. I would just like to say that I'm glad I work for an employer who does not observe Columbus Day. I think it's pretty offensive that there are still places that "celebrate" this as a holiday, honoring a person who basically discovered a slab of rock which was already discovered hundreds of years earlier, and ignoring the rest of the story.

Why don't we celebrate Bjarni Herjolfsson Day? Arguably, that would be more accurate, and certainly borne of less questionable morality. One reason for this biased history I've read is that the previous discoveries were not widely known at that time, so Columbus's was the first that was widely publicized. Ah, okay, I think I understand now. We're saying that widespread ignorance is a good excuse for perpetuating ignorance, right? So, if you don't know something, it's okay to educate others on false histories. That makes sense, right? So, if there were large groups of people who didn't know that Gutenberg invented movable type, it would be okay to call it a discovery ascribed to, say, the New York Times. (Interestingly enough, that's the type of story you might read in the New York Times. Ooh! Journalism burn!)

Now, before I continue, don't get me wrong: I can already anticipate people rising up and crying out, "How dare you call me ignorant, I just didn't know that information!" Well, that's not what I'm saying - there are still people out there who don't actually know the extent of the negative deeds committed by Columbus. Those aren't the ones I'm calling "ignorant," because they just haven't heard the true story yet. The ones who are truly ignorant are those who know the real story and simply stick their heads in the sand and ignore it. To see evidence and pretend it doesn't exist, or to hear facts and simply ignore them is the definition of ignorance. (That would be what we English-speaking peoples call a "root word.") Specifically, that ignorance is perpetrated by government leaders and historians who would see textbooks and history books written (and government holidays celebrated) in support of a history written largely with blinders worn.

To those people who haven't heard the story, I hope you'll hear it now and share it with others when you hear of the supposedly "great" exploits of the Columbus about whose deeds we are taught a saccharine and falsely heroic account. Accounts of the early days of his voyage are largely accurate - sailing from Spain after the end of the Ottoman-Neapolitan War and Granada conquest. His initial visit to the island of Hispaniola was a peaceful encounter with the Arawak tribe.

This is where things go downhill, and accounts begin to diverge from one another. In Columbus's subsequent returns, gifts were exchanged, which is another primary reason Columbus is celebrated in place of our old Viking friend Bjarni - he established two-way commerce. (Fun fact, Bjarni was also the name of the first-known form of children's entertainment. He was a purple "Viking Dinosaur," with a long blond beard, an iron-horned skullcap, and a trademark song of "I kill you, you kill me, but not if I kill you first, you see." Not to be confused with loveable gumshoe Bjarni Mjiller.)

I digress. I would again argue that this is not necessarily the best reason to celebrate someone - because they opened up the opportunity for wealthy European merchants and trading companies to become even more wealthy, and in exchange giving precious little. I think the more important exchange involved commodities which aren't typically traded on the free market. Native Americans received things like Smallpox and the concept of slavery, while Europeans received things like land that didn't belong to them (by murdering most of the inhabitants), a claim on many Natives' eternal souls (after, y'know, murdering them) and treaties which the Euros and resulting Americans had no intention of honoring (because they got in the way of all that murdering.)

The amazing part is, even in some accounts which acknowledge the atrocities committed by the first waves of explorers, somehow Columbus escapes scrutiny! Are we so brainwashed as a society that we're willing to practically deify a person and fool ourselves even further into believing he had nothing to do with the actions of a vast majority of his crew? Really? That would be like saying Hernán Cortéz was really a saint, it was his followers who wiped out the Aztecs beyond his control - Cortéz just stood on the beach saying, "Really, we should try talking about this first!" What a nice guy. Let's have Hernán Cortéz Day.

I think it would be better to have Dan Cortese Day.

No, Columbus was just as much a part of the raping, dismembering, murdering, and enslaving of the Native American people as the rest of his fellow explorers. Capture and enslave the strongest of the men, working them in silver mines (after he finally accepted there wasn’t much gold to be found.) Rape the female tribe members, then string them up with the rest who are too young, old, or sick to work in the mines. Hanged and burned, or enslaved. That was the legacy of Columbus, not just that of his followers and fellow explorers.

One last thing before I step off my soapbox. As a man with some Cherokee ancestors, am I the only one who sees a sort of ultimate and final ignominy in the fact that the grand “Admiral of the Sea” had NO clue where he had landed, and because of that, an entire race of people have been mis-named? He thought he landed in the Indies, so he figured, let’s call them all Indians, overlooking the fact that they, y’know, already had names. Never mind the fact he wasn’t in the Indies, and even after they figured that part out, they continued to call them Indians! That would be like someone sailing from Mongolia in the 1400’s, landing in Alaska and, assuming they had landed on an island of Russia, calling all of the Inuit people “East Russians.” And then somehow convincing people to call them that FOREVER, even after realizing their mistake. Or more appropriately, like Leif Erikson landing in Newfoundland (which he did) and calling the Mi’kmaq people “West Icelanders” (which he certainly did not, because he wasn’t ignorant and stubborn like Columbus.)

Now, were ALL Native Americans peaceful? Not necessarily. Many, like the Mohawk and Chiricahua didn’t necessarily need a reason for war. But just because some tribes were at war with each other doesn’t mean all tribes should be painted with the same brush, or that any of them should be considered savages. The tribes were capable of taking care of their own disputes, and any who warred without cause always ran the risk of encountering a tribe who’s fight or flight response slanted more toward defending their families and fighting back rather than running and saving themselves. The Native tribes certainly didn't need the sort of "help" the frontiersmen ended up offering.

It’s little surprise the settlers to follow thought it was okay to squat on the Native’s lands, to poach their food supplies for nothing but skins, to murder and label as savages those that had the nerve to defend themselves, their families, their land, and their livelihoods, and to strong-arm the proudest into accepting treaties the settlers had no intention of honoring. No wonder they had so little respect for the Native peoples of North America. The man who started it all didn’t even have enough respect to get their names right.

Here endeth the lesson.

Fever Dreams for the Fashion Conscious

So, everyone's heard the whole, "No white after labor day" rule. That's one of those things that nobody really pays attention to anymore, and it seems like it's "out" as a rule. But that doesn't stop people from needlessly telling others they're in violation of a now-defunct social order. Either they're deliberately being difficult or maybe they just didn't get the memo. Neverthelessi, it seems like half the population has heard that this is no longer a "rule" and are willing to argue the fact that they can wear whatever the Hell color they choose whenever they want, and the other half believe that THOSE people are just making excuses to cover their fashion faux-pas.

 

Whichever side you fall on, I thought now would be a good time to share some other obscure, little-known rules about clothing selection that you may or may not know. You'll thank me later!

 

Don't wear white to a wedding unless you're the bride. Everyone should know this one, you don't want to show-up the bride.

 

Don't wear green on Arbor Day. Trees are people too, insomuch as they aren't. You wouldn't want to hurt their feelings by overshadowing their greeness with your emerald-hued Lacoste polo.

 

Don't wear corduroy on the second Wednesday before Flag Day. Fun fact - did you know Betsy Ross didn't actually finish designing the flag until the Wednesday before George Washington needed it for a major textiles convention? Also, Betsy Ross was a dressmaker who would only craft things from gingham and worsted wool, because she had a visceral hatred for all things corduroy? Many speculate this is because she originally tried several times (and failed miserably) to sew a flag with a denim starfield over green and brown wide-wale cordury. In honor of that personality quirk, we have this rule. Keep the swish-swish in your closet on this day.

 

Don't wear clothing with patterns on March 14. Mathematicians love to celebrate "Pi Day," (3-14) but it is considered highly insulting to the number itself to wear anything which "repeats." (On an unrelated list, you are also advised not to eat chili on this day, for essentially the same reason.)

 

It's a well-established fact that 87% of all humans love unprovable statistics. Because of that, many UN Nations which celebrate "Statistics Day" encourage their citizens not to wear a red loincloth while throwing their mother-in-law's meatloaf at a family of rabbits. (**Statistics Day is not celebrated in North America. Crazy foreigners.)

 

When visiting Spain, do not wear tennis shoes to La Tomatina. This is less a fashion rule and more just a common sense thing. Unless you like permanently orange shoes.

 

While vertical stripes are slimming, you are encouraged NOT to wear them to sporting events. Though you won't be on the field, it will stimulate a response which would make Pavlov weep with pride. Inexplicably, people will feel compelled to yell obscenities at you every time they hear a whistle blow.

 

It is recommended by many that you do not wear your sunglasses at night, especially while operating heavy machinery. Because it's night. You could kill someone, fool.

 

Early Spring is known as the official beginning of sea turtle mating season. As such, for your own safety, and the self-respect of the turtles, it is strongly recommended for this 2-3 month period that you don't wear turtlenecks in coastal towns. I'd prefer not to say more than that.

 

Finally, during the summer months, it is vital that you not wear any type of shirt which exposes your midriff. This is especially important if you have good abs. Most people don't realize this, but new legislation has been passed in our country which requires anyone who sees this outfit/ab combo to yell, "We've got a situation over here!" at which point anyone within earshot must huddle around you and begin pumping their fist skyward and shouting "Beat that beat!"

 

Trust me, it's a cult-like behavior to witness, and I can only imagine what it would be like to experience it. It could fundamentally change your life for the worse and permanently skew your view of reality. Obviously, no one has to follow any of these "rules" laid out here, but don't say i didn't warn you.... Do yourselves a favor and don't open yourselves up to that kind of mental torment.

Toyota - now the passengers AND the car are screaming

Okay, so, the Toyota corporation this week announced that it is working on a way to make the Prius noisier, as a safety feature. This is announced at the same time as a sweeping Corolla and Matrix recall because of spontaneous engine stalling.

Wow, Toyota, I just want to congratulate you for having your priorities straight. I mean, if I run a multi-billion dollar corporation, I'm going to want to spend equal if not MORE time fixing an aesthetic issue as I have spent fixing actual problems with the cars.

Seriously?? You have cars which REFUSE to stop, and cars which stop spontaneously. And you actually spent time arguing with your loyal customers as to the validity of their claims! Yes, because it was a logical assumption on your part that drivers made a coordinated effort during the month of May to drive their vehicles VOLUNTARILY into the sides of donut shops and hair salons. Only reluctantly did you issue the recall, but finally did.

Now, you've really taken the hint on this Corolla/Matrix recall, because there was little hesitation in issuing the recall almost immediately after the problem was reported. I just hope you come up with a better "fix" than you did the first time through on the acceleration problem - although I'm sure if there's a way to fix it by "wedging a tiny thing between two larger things" you'll jump at the chance.

But it seems like this "car noise" thing is something that really could have waited. You've got cars driving into buildings, and other cars that just die on the road. But what's this? Our hybrids are quiet? Whoa, let's not waste any time here! Frankly, I can't imagine any drivers actually wanting their cars to sound like a cross between Fran Drescher, an air raid siren, and a ghost, but that's what you've delivered, by God!

I mean, fixing that in the midst of all the other problems facing Toyotas right now? It would've been like Lincoln signing an anti-green leafy vegetable law while that whole slavery thing was still needing to be fixed. Better yet, it would be like a Silverware company trying to make their butter knives shinier, while ignoring the fact that they have a pesky "exploding fork" problem.

Now, I get that the reason for doing this is to make pedestrians feel safer. People were apparently getting run over by silent hybrid cars that sneaked up behind them at 5 MPH or less. Now, first of all, to the pedestrians, I'd have to say, "Suck it up, people!" I mean, it's 5 miles per hour! If I swing a fly swatter at a fly at less than 5 MPH, it doesn't kill the fly! It thinks it's been hit by a tiny trampoline and calls its friends over for a birthday party.

But better yet, I mean, let's say that 5 MPH is deadly fast. Sure, someone could fall if they're startled, break something, hit their head, I get that. So, should we really be putting the responsibility on the pedestrians for being hit? Do we really hear this problem and say, "Well, if the car had just been noisier, they could have gotten out of the way!" I hear it and think, "Why the hell did the driver just keep going and hit the person??" Is this engine noise designed so people can just pay no attention whatsoever to the road and blame the pedestrians for not getting out of the way faster? If you were actually looking at the road, you would have seen the walker... so did you run over them on purpose?

Here's my final thought - if my engine is so quiet that the person in front of me can't hear me behind them, I can think of something that DOES make noise on the car - it's the horn. Honk that. Don't run over the person. And for the love of God don't make the car sound like an electronic Bjork, especially when you already have trouble making the cars stop, and also making them go. People have been trying to make Bjork just stop and go away for years, and we see how well that's worked....

After Shave and Vehicular Radar

Two things are on my mind today (aside from idiot drivers.)

 

First, I see that Infiniti has a new thing in their cars called the "Blind Spot Intervention System," where the car will sound an alarm if you try to change lanes into a location where a car may have been hidden in your blind spot.

 

You're not going to believe this, but I actually have had this system in each car I've owned, the current one being a 1987 Corvette, but it has a slightly different name. In this system, a device called "my face" is mounted on something called "my head," and swivels on this thing called "the neck." Okay, now stay with me - I know this sounds very technical and complicated, but, somehow, the head knows that I'm about to change lanes, so it swivels on the neck, and allows the face to SEE if there are cars in the lane next to you. It's a remarkable system, but it's been available on vehicles all the way back to the old 1895 Benz Motorwagen. The system even has the same name as it has had all these years: it's called, "Looking."

 

The other thing that's bugging me is a bit weirder. I usually use after shave lotion after I shave, the electric shaver can be a bit irritating. So, as I pick it up today, I notice a warning on the back of the bottle which says, "Caution: Do not use on broken, irritated, or sore skin." Now, no broken skin I understand, that's bad, and I think people with leprosy have bigger things to worry about than tightening their pores. But irritated and sore? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the purpose of after shave lotion? That's a lot like saying, "Don't take this headache medicine if you are experiencing headaches." Or, "This wall paint should not be used to cover up other colors." Or even, "Don't watch this Vin Diesel movie if you have problems with low self-esteem.

 

Or does the lotion company have another solution, maybe? They want me to buy another product to soothe the irritated skin, BEFORE putting on the after shave lotion? In which case, the after shave lotion serves WHAT purpose, again? Trust me, I want the stuff to soothe the irritation, I don't just have this overwhelming need to feel that my face is slightly damp. Know your place, after shave people.

 

WAIT, I figured it out - the after shave is designed to enhance the effectiveness of "the face" so it's easier to spot cars in your blind spot. The companies are working together, maybe!

 

No? Hm. Thought I was on to something there. What was my point again?

 

Oh, I remember - bad drivers suck.

Another Idiot Driver

Real men of genius. Here's to you, trailer towing F-250 guy. In a world where idiotic driving is commonplace, you are a clear standout. (Rocker voice: "Dumbest of the Dumb!") Knowing your exit is coming up in a quarter mile, do you stay in your lane and patiently wait to turn off? Why would you do a damn fool thing like that? (Rocker: "Sense is for sissies!") You cross not one, not two, but all three lanes of traffic in a single swoop, to pass the cars in each. But wait, what's that you see over there? Why, it's the lane where you started. And God knows you have to get back to it immediately. (Rocker: "EXIT!")

 

To paraphrase the great John Fitzgerald Kennedy, some people see things that are and ask why. You see my car in the lane next to you and ask, why not... nearly smash off the front of it with my rusty-ass steel trailer. (Rocker: "Defy the laws of physics!") In one smooth motion, you fly back across the lanes with a careless ignorance that reminds me of... carelessly ignorant people. (Rocker: "DICK!") In a time when there obviously isn't enough death and destruction in the world, in a place where traffic backups are as common as a morning cup of coffee, we salute you, Mr. Trailer Towing F-250 Guy. (Mr. Trailer Towing F-250 Guy....)

The A-Team... and movie reviews in general....

Okay, something a bit different this time. I want to preface this by saying I am not trying to influence anyone's opinion of this movie or any movie, I prefer people watch films for themselves and make their own decisions, and then see if they agree with the reviews. That's part of the problem with the movie-going experience today. People tend to allow bloggers and reviewers to spoon-feed them opinions, rather than putting forth the effort to go see it themselves and form their own opinions. As a society, we really have to learn to take with a grain of salt what these bloggers and reviewers say. I wish I had a nickel for every time I read a review which completely bashed a film, only to go see the film for myself and end up enjoying it. Don't cheat yourself of a good entertainment opportunity based on someone else's opinion. Frankly, I'd be interested to know when was the last time these disagreeable, bitter, curmudgeonly balls of vitriol actually had an enjoyable experience, from a film or anything else for that matter. From what I've seen in the world, most people who seem to have a forcefully negative opinion about EVERYTHING either have an ulterior motive, or simply don't know what they're talking about. And really, if negative movie reviews aren't designed to hijack people's opinions of films, then why do reviewers make these reviews available before the film actually releases? Over the past week I've read several reviews of, for example, The Other Guys, which still doesn't release for another four days.

And believe me, for those people who HAVE seen for themselves the movie I'm going to discuss (or any movie,) and decide they hate it, then great, God bless, you've done your duty (Lord knows I have a couple of friends who loved the show but hated the movie - but they actually went and saw it with an open mind.) Like I said, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. But for those people who decide NOT to see a movie simply because of what someone else thinks, or go into a movie with their minds made up they're going to hate it, or decide that a movie is going to be bad because it's based on a TV show (and is therefore unimaginative) or had 11 different writers (and therefore probably could be described by a word which rhymes with "dusterchuck") and write a review based on those preconceived notions, then, shame on them.
 

That said, I watched the A-Team yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. I was skeptical, because there had been quite a bit of negative reviews for it, but I went into this the same way I go into every film - open minded. For this particular film, I like the source material, I like the actors, and I like the premise, so I gave it a shot. I wasn't disappointed. Then again, I'm a 31-year-old man and grew up watching the show, so I sort of fall into the target demographic anyway.

 
***Spoilers ahead - beware!

See, the trick is, you have to know what to expect when you go into it. I believe a person's enjoyment of a film is directly proportional to their expectations. If you go into this film expecting Oscar-winning art direction, deep character development, or Liam Neeson shouting "Release the Kraken!" every five minutes, then you'll be disappointed. If you go in expecting a fun summer action movie, then you'll enjoy it. That's all.

I've read some HORRIBLE reviews from a lot of people (read: Deadline Hollywood, Box Office Mojo, Hollywood Reporter) complaining that the plot is too shallow (or non-existent) to which I have to say, "Did you SEE the original show??" The plot can be easily summed up for any episode of the TV show, as well as the movie:

1. Someone is a bad guy. They are often wearing all black.

2. There will be a plan (which, at some point, will come together.)

3. The plan will be executed by the same 4 wrongly-convicted, escaped Army Rangers.

4. At some point, everything will seem to be going to shit, but wait! It's really part of the plan.

I'm going to stop using the word plan for the time being. But that's really it. Nothing earth shaking or high concept. It's intrigue, twists, switcheroos, explosions, and light-hearted action.

In the film, the origin story was rehashed a bit, to make it more current, but it boiled down to a group of Army Rangers meeting during a generic mission, then staying together for 8 years, 80 missions in Iraq. During a mission to recover money-printing plates from an Iraqi insurgent, they are framed for a crime they didn't commit, by a group of independent contractors looking to print their own money. Blackforest is led by Pike, dressed in the aforementioned all-black body armor and bodysuit.

During the mission-gone-bad, the man who sent Smith and his Team on the mission to recover the plates (General Morrison) is supposedly killed, but it turns out later he was in league with Pike to get the plates and split the profits.

There was a wild card in all of this, though - a man from the CIA calling himself "Lynch" was responsible for Hannibal and company being sent on this mission. As it turns out, Lynch is the linchpin (look, a pun!) in the crime for which the A-Team was framed. Lynch is your typical "evil mastermind" type of baddie who runs things from the shadows, appears to be "one of the good guys," but turns out later to be anything but. Can't blame people for not knowing - after all, he wasn't wearing all-black. This does fit with the "bad guy rule of three" where there should always be an obvious baddie, a shadowy mastermind, and a turncoat that goes bad and works with the criminals.

As expected, the team breaks out of jail and goes on a mission to clear their names, get revenge, and finish the original mission by recovering the stolen plates.

In a bit of a twist, instead of Hannibal being the one to come up with the plan every time, Face ends up coming up with the big plan in the end of the film, sort of redeeming himself for always being the impulsive guy with poor judgment. The plan is carried off successfully, but not without a hitch or two, a few massive explosions, and the occasional "wild swing from hanging cables to land on precarious footing which seemed to come from nowhere."

In the end, the crew is redeemed, but locked back up for escaping from prison, despite the wrongful accusations which landed them there in the first place (and as Hannibal says, it's still a crime to escape from prison, even if you were wrongly convicted.)

I have neglected to mention that Charissa Sosa is an agent tasked with finding and reclaiming the plates. She is integral in the final plan working out, and ultimately she reconciles with her ex, Face, and helps them clear their names. However, in the course of clearing their names and receiving the thanks of the CIA, she inadvertently aids in their recapture due to their escape. On an odd side note, I had no idea her name was Sosa until about halfway through the film, even though she's introduced (through a visceral exchange with Face) in the first 20 minutes of the film. Does that seem odd to anyone else?

So, in the spirit of the plot breakdown above, here is how character development (and archetypes) will work for A-Team films and episodes:

1. Hannibal will be cool.

2. Face will be a sarcastic slickster.

3. Murdoch will be crazy.

4. BA will beat people up and be afraid of planes. He may also drink milk (Mr. T version only.)

5. The obvious bad guy will be obvious and bad.

6. The "ringleader" will be evil but less obvious (though, he should be pretty obvious, too.)

7. The turncoat will disappoint people with his lack of honor.

8. Jon Hamm will play Don Draper with the code name Lynch (taking over for the previous bad Lynch.)**

9. Jessica Biel will play Jessica Biel. 'Nuff said.**

**Applies to film only.

On a couple of side notes, first, BA's "pick up Pike and drop him on his head" thing is probably one of the coolest kills I've seen in an action movie.

Also, in closing, who knew that those little electronic voice boxes from talking dolls are so high-tech they can be used to recreate the voice of any human? That's impressive technology for a Betsy Wetsy.

Game Week, Day 5 - Donkey Kong Country Returns

I love video games, I really do. Which is why I'm sad that Jimmy Fallon's game week ended with something of a fizzle, at least compared to the other great games this week. Because now I have to be mean. That's doubly painful given that I've been a Nintendo fan all my life, and it's really the company whose systems I cut my gaming "teeth" on as a child, the one with the fondest childhood memories.

Tonight's installment of game week is Donkey Kong Country Returns. Really? Nintendo, I remember DKC as being, basically, a re-skinned version of a Mario-style game. This comparison was most painfully obvious when DKC 64 came out, looking a lot like Mario 64 with simians.

You couldn't have brought a different game into the next generation of systems? Something like Pilotwings, maybe? Or Earthbound? How cool would that be? Even something quirky like A Boy and His Blob would be a blast in Wii-style, maybe in first person or third person over the shoulder, flipping him a jelly bean by waggling the Wiimote, and working through the game's trademark puzzles. You couldn't even give us a clever re-spelling of "country" with a "K" maybe?

No? Sticking with Donkey Kong Country? Okay, then. This week's project was about games that are on the way, not games that would be cool if they happened. So here goes.

DKC seems to be a visually stunning rehash of the series instalments, with a few twists and additions. There is definitely a focus on cooperative multiplayer in this one, teaming up to traverse parts of the various levels, or having Diddy ride piggy-back on Donkey to be carried around like a squawky, peanut-throwing Jansport backpack.

There are also a few new moves, perfected for Wii-motions. But all in all, this doesn't seem like a wildly innovative step for the franchise, like you'd expect from the next-gen systems. Super Mario Galaxy is an amazing example of how a company can take a series from its previous console and revolutionize it for the current generation. DKC Returns doesn't feel like it has that same wow factor, and the "new" stuff feels like what I would basically expect from one version of a game to the next on the SAME system - nothingly wildly different, just a few new twists....

There. I said it. I didn't want to, but I'm just being honest. I still love you, though, Nintendo. We straight?

Thanks folks for giving my late-night "project" a read! I hope you enjoyed it, and I'll bring more reviews like this to you in the future!

Game Week, Day 4 - Killzone 3

Okay, I have mixed feelings about tonight's entry, Killzone 3. Good and bad, so let's get started.

First off, in the interest of full disclosure, I've never played a Killzone game. So I approached tonight's demo on Jimmy Fallon's show with an open mind and a clean slate. The developer describes it as "World War II, 500 years in the future, with access to spaceships." Okay, I'm more than a little intrigued so far. Frankly, it sounds like Sony's answer to Microsoft's Halo franchise, which is definitely not a bad thing in my book.

While Killzone's storyline sounds (vaguely) like Halo, the realism is light years past Halo. (Read: not more advanced, just grittier and more realistic.) The levels shown were hyper-realistic, with good graphics (what you'd expect from a PS3 game, or any next-gen system) and lots of blood, severed limbs, and explosions. So, think of it more like Call of Duty set WAAAAYY in the future. (Perhaps a sneak peek of what may be in store with the recently-reserved web address hinting at a Call of Duty: Future Warfare? Time will tell.)

What I was not crazy about was the choice of level for demo in the first part. The level was one of those overly typical "non-player character flys you around a structure while you shoot stuff." The reason this was a bad choice is that it is inherently limited as first-person shooter levels go. You are forced to go at the NPC's pace, and the only game feature shown off is the ability to point and shoot. Hardly innovative.

Now, if innovation is what we're looking for (and it definitely is, at least in part) then I wasn't disappointed with the next segment. Apparently this game is the first to make use of 3D technology, and if Jimmy's reactions were any indication (mostly shouts of OH MY GOD! and one comment of, "It's like a Viewmaster, only we're killing things!") then the effect is very good indeed.

What was slightly disappointing was that there was no way to convey this to the home audience, or even the studio audience. The only one who could enjoy it was Jimmy, and the rest of us were stuck with that double-image you always get when watching 3D with no glasses.

Also somewhat ominous were the developer's choice of words. He said, "You have to have one of these new Sony Bravia 3D HDTV's." Now, I won't even get started on why I don't like 3D TV ($150 per pair of glasses??) What concerns me here is, was this Bravia comment just a convenient plug by a Sony developer for another Sony product, meaning you can really use ANY 3D TV, or could this be a hint at an entirely new level of exclusivity? Was the developer saying that not only is this game Sony exclusive, but the 3D functionality will only work on a Sony TV? Let's hope not....

The game isn't slated to release until February of 2011 (sorry Holiday buyers) so there's plenty of time for these and other questions to be answered.... Namely, who in their right mind spends $150 on a pair of 3D glasses, which you'll still need to keep batteries in? If remote controls had cost $150 when they first came out, we'd have a lot more people still walking across the room to change the channel today....

Tune in tomorrow for the final day of Game Week!

Game Week, Day 3 - Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit

Today's installment of game week brings us something that may not feel all that unfamiliar, Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit for Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. I know what you're thinking, I liked it the first time, when it was on PC and was called... Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit.

But wait, don't be hasty my young hobbits! This episode (I think we're up to 114 now) in the NFS series takes things back to the game's roots, and refreshes this particular series with a console edition. In addition to the traditional souped-up vehicles, this installment features a couple of new twists. One such twist is the ability to choose whether to be the pursuer or the pursuee (and I know the Smokey and the Bandit fans will love that line) enabling you to choose to control one of the super-powered police vehicles, and do the chasing from that side of the law.

Also, a new "social networking" aspect will be included, no doubt allowing you to spam your friends' news feeds with thousands of announcements like "I need help building a garage for my car farm," or, "I just found a lost Delorean on my property!"

Sure, there will be the ability to develop careers, both specific to a single car, as well as driver careers across multiple cars. But the bottom line is, this game involves plenty of what you would expect - lots of fast driving, chasing, and more often than not, crashing. Why, I've never seen anything like it.... The closest comparison I can think of is... a game called Need for Speed... maybe you've heard of it?

Game Week, Day 2 - Call of Duty: Black Ops

Day two of Late Night's Game Week treated us to some hands-on footage of Call of Duty: Black Ops, which looks to be the best Treyarch-branded entry in the dual-company game series. Heretofore, Treyarch has handled the odd-numbered installments, while partners-in-war Infinity Ward have handled the evens. The problem with that for Treyarch is that IW emerged as the more skilled developer with the release of CoD 2 and so every game which Treyarch released was inevitably compared to IW's previous release, and usually fell well short of the mark.

Now, personally, I've always enjoyed the Treyarch games, but have always found the multiplayer to be lacking compared to the IW installments. Storyline of single player has never been a problem. I think the smartest thing for Treyarch to do was to pick a completely new location and time period, and that's exactly what they've done with Black Ops.

I've been beating a drum for a couple of years, saying it would be smart to see Call of Duty visit Vietnam. In Black Ops we are set in Southeast Asia in the late 60's, likely playing a part in Cambodia, Vietnam, and as demonstrated on Jimmy's show tonight, Laos.

Historically, this will be a great time and location in which to set CoD. Add to that the fact that it's entirely new territory for the franchise, eliminating the damaging comparison's to IW's entries, and this could be the best thing to happen to Treyarch since they first became involved with the series.

We didn't have much time to see a lot of different things in tonight's demo, but what we did see was VERY appealing. Vehicular combat makes a return, but whether that will include tanks is unclear. What we DID see were Hind helicopters being flown and controlled by the player. That alone is worth the price of admission.

Visually, the graphics look stunning, and it would be cool to hear a couple of more guest voice-actors, like Keifer Sutherland and Gary Oldman in Treyarch's last installment, the WWII-themed World at War. The developer was very closed-mouthed about any details other than Laos, 1968, so it's unclear what else this entry has in store for us Gamers, but I look forward to finding out!

The only other thing I can say is, I hope they have spent as much time on storyline in this one as they spent on figuring out how to make people realistically blow apart in World at War....

Game Week 1: Microsoft Kinect

Okay, this week will be a bit of a departure for me, as I am planning to discuss items previewed on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon's "Game Week." Don't get me wrong, I'm hoping to provide plenty of pithy observations... along with sporadic use of the word "pithy."

So, day one of game week starts with a bang, previewing Microsoft's new controller-free gaming system, Kinect. From what I've seen, it looks fantastic, not just in practical gaming applications, but also the potential for future development. On tonight's show, two games were featured, Kinect Adventures, and Kinect Sports. The sports game looks to be the more fun of these two, but both looked enjoyable. We need to see more of "Adventures," because as of now we've really only seen the "jumping in a raft" aspect of that game and don't know if it has more variety than that. Sports will definitely have a selection of sports to choose, which automatically makes it look more interesting. Compare this to similar games on the Wii like Wii Sports Resort.

Really, I'm hoping not to do a disservice to the system by making the inevitable comparison between the Wii and Kinect, because the systems are remarkably dissimilar. The Wii has players essentially shackled to the system with a remote. With Kinect, you have no such restriction, playing games and even watching movies or otherwise controlling the system with movement of your entire body, and with voice control, through the system's motion-capture, voice rcognition, and even facial and body recognition.

Imagine if someone told you that, as much as you love your current TV remote, they have now developed a technology which allows you to control your entire entertainment system through voice commands and... interpretive dance. That's how the Wii compares to Kinect.

The games look to suffer from the usual "first time" issues. Imagine the first Nintendo, Sega, or Atari games. They seemed great in the beginning, but as programmers grew familiar with the technology, the quality of the applications increased almost exponentially. Now, I'm not saying don't get this system right away, because I'll probably get one on launch, and it will be fun. But, be expecting vast improvements on the games in the year following Kinect's release.

To give you an example, I remember playing Wave Race 64 when the Nintendo 64 came out. It looked great, and made the best use of the technology as programmers were able at the time. But things only got better from there. That's the same feeling I got from Kinect Adventures - looks good, but things will get even more impressive. And given the quality of today's next-gen systems, I believe the improvement will take place much more quickly than it did under older-generation equipment.

Kinect is slated for a November 4th launch, side-by-side with 15 games designed specifically for Kinect, but the system will also be used by other games developed to take advantage of the new hardware. There is no official Microsoft-stated price point as of yet, but rumors abound regarding a $149.99 price (which seems to be loosely validated by a pre-order page on Gamestop's website listing that price.) Kinect will work with all xbox 360s, new and old. The only difference is, the newest 360 SKU (gloss black and chrome, with a 250 GB hard drive) is "Kinect-ready," which reportedly means the Kinect device will be powered by an on-board power supply, while older systems will require a separate power supply for the Kinect hardware (supplied with the device.) No word yet as to what the extra power requirement may do for the internal heat situation on the new box.

More to come tomorrow!

WRITER'S NOTE, JUNE 23: The $149 price point now appears to be confirmed by multiple retailers, and even MS themselves.

BP - Beyond Pathetic

Okay, I want to get something out of the way first. I don't usually get too "serious" in my blog, and there will be humor later, but I need to say this. This oil disaster in the gulf is heartbreaking, and my thoughts and prayers go out to the families of the 11 lost workers, and the working families whose lives and livelihoods are impacted by this catastrophe. Initially, I didn't blame BP for the actual explosion itself - and frankly, I still don't think they were mostly to blame for the equipment malfunction itself. The company that owned, operated, and maintained the equipment would be the more logical target. However, unless you're an investigator, that's no longer the point. The point is, BP has agreed to take care of the mess, so they should, y'know... do that.

Right now it seems like little to no time is being spent actually enacting these fixes that they talk about. It sounds like they have decided that the "relief well" is going to be the only valid solution, and so why bother putting their full effort into anything else? They don't have the ability to stop the damned leak, but they DO have the ability to set up a live feed on the ocean floor, showing us just how unsuccessful the efforts to stop it have been? Really? That would be like saying, "Hey, we don't have the technology to land on Mars yet, but we DO have the ability to build remotely a perfect 1/8th scale erector set model of Manhattan Island. On Mars."

To borrow a phrase from a friend of mine, "Put a brick on it." (I call this method the "Kaged Thunder.") I mean, if BP had spent as much time coming up with logical solutions as they spent on coming up with cool names for their projects, they'd have it stopped by now. Seriously, we've had the "Containment Dome" (or ConDom for short...) the Top Kill, the Junk Shot, and the Top Hat (which, by the way, they never used. They lowered it to the ocean floor and then... what? They certainly never tried it.)

Their latest attempt involves robots slicing a clean cut through the pipe, and then capping it with one of four different devices, which are basically just variously configured top hats. And do you know what they call this method? They call it... wait for it... "Cut and cap." That's it? That's more a description than a name, isn't it?

To me, this is a sure sign that BP has given up. If they've lost the will to come up with clever names, they've lost any desire to actually fix the problem. Not that they won't keep trying, but I have a feeling they'll be half-hearted attempts, because they already have their hearts set on the relief well being the only cure.

If imagination is the problem, let me help, please. I can come up with clever names for your projects, so you guys can refocus your energy on something that actually matters, like actually FIXING THE PROBLEM. Here are some thoughts:

1. Take the current project, for example. A bunch of stiff robots, clumsily going through a series of intricate choreography. Instead of "Cut and Cap," I recommend we call this, "The Kate Gosselin."

2. How about stacking a mile long column of bad DVD's, then sliding that into the broken pipe? This could be called, "The Gigli."

3. How about giving a stand up comedian a once-in-a-lifetime shot at stopping the leak, only to be replaced by another who demands the opportunity? You could call it "The Leno," just don't be surprised when the replacement doesn't do any better than the other....

4. Listen to James Cameron's shamelessly self-promoting idea, which involves using something called "Unobtanium" to congeal the oil before it leaves the pipe. He calls it "Ava-TAR." Seriously, will someone get this guy a hobby?

5. Get the Dharma Initiative to build a small room around the leak. In this room, place only a computer and a small chair. Every 3 seconds, someone must press the Space Bar, or the leak will start again, destroying the room and anyone in it. You can call this one, "WHY THE HELL WAS THERE A CORK IN THE ISLAND?!?!"

6. Have Jesse James be the one in charge of pressing the Space Bar in example 5. This way, we'll finally be rid of him and he'll be someplace where we know he can't cause any more problems. I call this one "The Waste of Space."

Okay, here's one last idea. If you don't like this one, I don't know what to tell you. How about a group of people who make an obscene amount of money (no, not the NBA) puts their heads together (IMPORTANT: This means your heads will have to be out of your asses) and comes up with a plan to fix what should be a less-than-impossible problem. Don't worry about 4 months from now. Fix it now. Don't worry about trying to pass the cost on to your customers - you screwed it up, don't expect someone else to pay for fixing it for you. You could call it "The BP," instead of what it's currently called, "The Fantasy World."

Oh, and for the love of God, if people want to offer you ideas, fine, but stop asking the general public to come up with an idea to fix it. This is part of what your scientists and engineers get paid for out of your ridiculous yearly profits - it's damage control. And it really makes you look even sillier and more incompetent than you already appear.

If you think I'm being unreasonable, consider this final thought: in all the times I've visited a hospital in my life, I have yet to see a doctor run into the waiting room and yell at the patients, "Quick, who knows how to set a broken bone? I have never seen anything remotely like this!"

That's all for now....

Worst... advertising... EVER....

I would like to air a few grievances with companies who think they are effectively marketing their products to me, but are really just annoying the hell out of me.

1. UPS. What can brown do for you? Maybe I should have started with a different one, because this one always leaves me shaking my head, speechless. First of all, every time I hear this slogan, I think of bathroom humor. I'm sorry if that makes me an 11 year old boy, but I do. Second, while I think it was an odd choice to make their primary color "brown," that's beside the point - who refers to their company based on the main color of the logo? It would be like FedEx saying, "Orange and blue delivers fast for you!" Or the US Postal Service saying, "Mail Trucks: the Robert Duvall of delivery. They're old, white, and a lot slower than they should be!"

And while we're on the subject, what else would I WANT "brown" to do for me? Have they added to their list of services? Because if it doesn't have to do with shipping packages, I'm probably not going to UPS....

2. DHL - "Yellow is the new Brown." Sheesh. Way to drink the Kool-Aid, DHL.

3. There are a couple of car dealerships in the Houston area which advertise using animated talking cars. This by itself isn't that annoying, but ONE of these dealerships decided to make the cars have bad attitudes. I mean SERIOUSLY bad. In each of the commercials, the owner comes on and talks a bit about his dealership, and then the car starts speaking in a really egotistical manner and for the most part, insulting the owner through the commercial. Is this supposed to make me want to buy a car from them? Because unless you're pushing a model called the "Chrysler Jackass" it's really not effective. The only thing in which you've succeeded is making me want to find your lot and punch the cars in the face. (Oh, hell, you've made me think of them as having faces now. I hate you.)

4. He went to Jared. I'm going to say this once. Are you listening? Good. I could not begin to tell you HOW LITTLE I CARE WHERE HE WENT! Sorry. Don't know where I went there for a second. Really, though. Shut up.

5. Capital One - What's in your wallet? I'm not telling. Because, first of all, there's NOTHING in my wallet; I sent it all to my Capital One bill! And if I tell you what's in my wallet, you'll probably figure out a way to adjust my rates or assess fees so you can get the REST!

6. Greyhound - Leave the driving to us. Also good things to leave to Greyhound? Crashing, burning, and settling personal injury lawsuits.

7. M&Ms melt in your mouth, not in your hand! Okay, I love you M&Ms, but you have to stop this false advertising. Which one of us as kids didn't test this theory by grabbing a handful and holding them tight, only to come out of it with a sticky multicolored hand? When the Red Bull people say "It gives you wings," they don't actually try to convince you that you can jump out of a building after drinking one and NOT experience a sudden failure to live. So, why all the deception, M&Ms?

8. Toyota - I love what you do for me. This one just writes itself, doesn't it? Do I really need to say, "Yes, if what you do for me is take my brakes away and crash me into the back of a semi at 90 MPH?" I do? Oh, okay.

9. This one goes back home for me. In Iowa there was a power company, don't know if they're still around, with the name MidAmerican Energy, and their slogan was "Obsessively, relentlessly at your service." Really, MidAmerican Energy? You don't think that sounds a bit desperate? 'Cause I'd be okay with just "At my service whenever I ask for it." If I open my bedroom door and find you lurking on the other side asking if you can help me out with my power lines, I will react to you in much the same way I react to an obnoxious talking car.

Oh and get this, their address in Des Moines is 666 Grand Avenue! I can think of another historical figure who relentlessly tries to get you to sign a contract with him... in fact I think he had the same address....

10. Finally... Southwest Airlines has been pushing its new ad campaign lately. I know you want me to go on a vacation and book a flight with you in the process. But please, I beg you, for the love of all that is good and pure in this world, PLEASE stop commanding me to "Grab my bag." Seriously. Stop it.

You don't know me like that, Southwest Airlines....

Limited Time Offer...

Odd...

I saw an ad in a flyer this weekend which baffled me. I know that companies have gotten to the point where they cut down on any "extras" included with their products, for the most part to save money. Understandable. Except where those things they choose NOT to put in are actually required to use the item.

It doesn't really matter what the item was, but the important thing was, in the description of the item it said, "Act now and get a FREE AC Adaptor ($4.99 value!)" Wow. So, you're selling me this thing, and if I act now, I'll also get the ability to use it? Great. Because if I bought it at some other time and found out there was NO CORD in with it, you know... I might feel kind of screwed.

This, to me, is possibly the worst kind of sleazy marketing. You're making it seem like a perk to give people the AC Adaptor. It's not. It isn't like buying a Blu-Ray player that only comes with composite (yellow) video cables, because you can still use it, you just have to get a BETTER cable to get the best picture. It's not even like a Printer company selling you a printer but not putting in a USB cable, because they figure you're replacing another printer and don't NEED another USB cable. If I buy something, I need POWER. If it's not a battery-operated device (which this one is NOT) then of COURSE it needs a power cord!

It's not even like we could choose to use a different cable, or go to the store and buy a universal power cable - we live in America, land of the free, home of companies that can choose to shape their power inputs like tiny trapezoids. Or maple leaves. Or... the silhouette of Alfred Hitchcock. Good luck finding that on a Best Buy rack.

You can't even use another cable which may just HAPPEN to be shaped the same! Electronics have so many different power requirements, you could have a Laptop adaptor which supplies 12 Amps, which is the same size and shape as the AC adaptor for your coffee pot, but look out, the coffee pot only uses 6 Amps, so if you switch the two, that toxic smell you notice won't be your toast burning.

Selling a product in this day and age with no AC adaptor would be like selling a remote control with no buttons. Or selling a refrigerator and saying, "Act now and receive a one-month supply of cold air free!" Or hiring Jesse James for a day without Sandra Bullock to increase his star quality. Sure, the one will sit somewhere in your home and take up space, but without the other, they'll NEVER WORK.

It's not an unfair request to make. If you sell someone a thing... make sure they have what they need to make that thing work as advertised. Otherwise, you should change your ad from, "Super-fast laptop computer (memory not included)" to "Big rectangular paperweight."

Halls Cough Drops - Satan in Lozenge Form

Dear Halls Cough Drop People,

Please stop trying to convince the world that "Mentho-lyptus" is really a flavor. It's not. It combines the deliciousness of Eucalyptus, which is loved by koalas all over the word (read: Australia) and "Menthol," which is really only loved by smokers for its valuable ability to poorly disguise the fact that you're sucking on a burning twig. Combining two terrible flavors doesn't make the new flavor any more bearable. You may as well come up with a new flavor called "Bamboo-ijuana," which would be loved by both pandas and pot-heads alike.

While we're on the subject, what the Hell did you people do to Menthol, anyway? It's a crystal made from Peppermint oil, which seems pretty hard to screw up, but somehow you managed to make it taste like deer urine filtered through a lunch-lady's hairnet. (Hey, there's your next flavor idea! I'll give you that one free as long as you promise NOT to give me credit.)

Even worse, Halls Plus, which has actual syrup in the middle. Congratulations, you've discovered something which, at best, makes people say, "No thanks, I'll keep the sore throat," and at worst, makes them beg for the sweet release of death. So, just when you start to think you're almost finished with that vile pseudo-candy rock in your mouth, it spits a ball of goo down the back of your throat... you know, to give you an aftertaste which reminds you all evening of just how delicious a piece of candy can be when it's flavored like trees and cigarettes.

But worst of all has to be the ones which look like candy, so you aren't even expecting the disgustingness you're about to receive. I swear, the next time I grab a red candy from a dish thinking I'm getting "cherry" only to find out I'm getting "Icy Strawberry" or "Cherry-lyptus" I'm suing you for damages.

Thanks, Halls Brothers, for replacing coughs with nausea for over 110 years. And congratulations on your side-businesses, the coconut-mango jelly bean, and the Dum Dum sucker made to taste like hot buttered popcorn.

Sincerely,
People with Tongues

Support my cause - I Love Waffles!

Okay, so, we as a society really need to stop cannibalizing images to make them stand for our own purposes. Let me just describe the scene for you:

I'm driving down the road on my way to work this morning, and I pass a car with a magnetic ribbon on the back. You've seen these before, they have really good messages of "remembrance," yellow ribbons to remind us of soldiers overseas, pink ribbons to remind us of the fight against breast cancer, even black ribbons in memory of Prisoners of War.

Except, this one was completely different. This was a white ribbon. Okay so far. But here's where it gets odd - the ribbon in question had the words, "I LOVE SOCCER!" scrawled across it. So... what started out as fights against diseases and supporting the troops has turned into the appropriate way to express completely pointless and innocuous things. Don't they have better ways of doing this? Like, bumper stickers, internet message board signatures, or in the depressing silence of your bedroom as you utter a prayer to David Beckham?

Incidentally, this car did NOT have spinner hubcaps, so I'll save that for another blog, as a friend of mine mentioned this as a particular pet peeve.

Back on topic, it's not that supporting a cause is a bad thing, nor is it objectionable to announce to the world your love for certain people, places, things, or ideals. But can't we just leave certain images alone, and allow them to represent that for which they were originally intended? A white "I LOVE SOCCER" ribbon is a bit like having, say, a brown ribbon with the words "I FINISHED THE DENNY'S GRAND SLAM IN UNDER NINE SECONDS SO THEY GAVE IT TO ME FOR FREE."

Or maybe like a Ford logo inside a Jesus Fish....

Don't get me wrong. Like I said, I like the original "cause" ribbons. And I actually like soccer, too. But whereas I can totally understand rallying support for troops overseas and fighting illnesses, I can't wrap my mind around rallying people to support your preference of European foot-sport.

I guess if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, though. If we as a society persist in stealing images and twisting them around to inane purposes, then my first act will be to file a patent on the image of a Crucifix with a "Kilroy was here" painted on it... and also a trademark on Andy Warhol's iconic image of Marilyn Monroe, but with a Photoshopped speech bubble saying, "I love Diet Pepsi!"

Ninja Librarians and Cell Phones

Okay, so, I feel like this is quickly turning into a “Products no one needs” blog, first with Nut Milk and now this… but really, I can’t be the only one who notices these things.

Would everyone here raise his or her hand if you feel you need a phone which will search the internet, your songs, your contacts, and Google maps all for the same word? No one? Okay, that confirms my suspicion. I keep seeing this commercial for Verizon’s “Droid” smart phone, and I just can’t take it anymore. It boasts a phone which can search the internet for sites about the word “Human,” find locations through Google maps with the word Human, find friends with the word Human in their name (which it admits would be weird if you had any… d’ya think?) and can also search for songs that you forgot you downloaded, with the word Human in them.

So, my question would be, what earthly purpose does this serve? On that RARE occasion when this might be useful, are we really so lazy now that we can’t just do a couple of different searches – one in music, one on the web, one in Google maps, etc.? Does it really take that much time?

Usually, though, it won’t be useful at all - I mean, when I search for something on my phone, I usually want one thing, not four or five different things which are all connected by one word. For example, let’s say I want to find a song on my iPhone by the 70’s group Starbuck. (I don’t have any, they sucked, it’s just an example.) Not only do I find the song (entitled “Everybody Be Dancin’” in case you’re wondering; again, please don’t take this as real, it could seriously damage my reputation) I also find directions to the nearest Starbuck’s on Google Maps. Oh, and look, I receive a Wikipedia article with the Character Profile of Starbuck from Moby Dick (stop giggling.) AND, I am stunned to learn that at some point I met the actress who played Starbuck on Battlestar Galactica and put her in my Contacts.

So, this is terribly useful for me if I want to drive to the nearest Starbuck’s, call “Starbuck” on the phone, and explain to her the origin of the name “Starbuck,” all the while playing some groovy “Starbuck” background music. Yeah. That seems really practical.

More often I would think it would be ridiculously annoying, like being assaulted by information you’re not really looking for. I mean, we already can barely do a simple internet search including the word “tiger” without receiving a flood of junk related to Exxon mascots and jackass golfers, when all we were really interested in was learning how many Bengals are left in Asia. Do we really need a phone that multiplies that by four? I don’t think so, but I’ve been wrong before.

If that DOES sound useful, look at it another way: imagine going to a library (one of those brick-and-mortar places with all the books that sadly almost no one uses anymore) and looking for a National Geographic article on quicksand. You’re thrilled to find the article almost immediately. But, before you can find your way out of the stacks, you find yourself suddenly buried under a pile of old Mythbusters DVDs about Quicksand, various editions of Don Quixote, and a hundred encyclopedias all containing entries starting with Q. (Don’t ask me how that would happen, I’m just saying… maybe the librarian used some crazy Ninja Librarian skills to get above you and dump them on your head….) My point is, that would be kind of like what the Droid does for you. It’s a Ninja Librarian that helps you find the 10 page article you’re looking for, then crushes you under a thousand pounds of books you didn’t want. Or something like that.

Open Letter to the Almond Milk People

Dear Almond Breeze,

No thank you. While I do love milk, and I do love almonds, I do not need milk made from almonds, for a host of reasons. First, even for the people who have lactose intolerance, there are several different types of lactose-free milk which taste EXACTLY like regular milk. I have tasted them, so I'm not just giving an empty testimonial.

Oh, and, if it is made from other things, is it really milk? I'm going a long way to use the term "milk" with Soy Milk, let alone Almond Milk.... Making milk from almonds is like Quincy Jones remaking We Are the World with today's artists; no matter how much like the original you try to make it, it's clear to everyone that there were lots of nuts involved.

I'm just going to float this phrase out there. Nut milk. 'Nuff said. Doesn't that just scream "deliciousness" right in your face? No. And by the way, I don't really need a food (or anything else for that matter) which could potentially invite any number of inappropriate comments. Especially from 8th graders. Or George Carlin. Or the city of Amsterdam.

We're sorry to be blunt. But look at it this way: now your company can get back to your more profitable projects, like Sawdust Steak, the SPAMCar, and the amazing TurkeyShirt - the shirt made from 100% reprocessed turkey!

Sincerely,
Earth

Robotic Groundhogs, the Colonial Army, and You

Okay, I've been thinking about doing this for a while but have never really made the time. So, you know it had to be something important to get me to commit to writing a blog. What type of subject could possibly motivate me so? You guessed it. The idea of replacing Punxsutawney Phil with a robot.

Let me say that again.

PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) has suggested replacing Punxsutawney Phil with a robot. Now, I love the folks at PETA, they stand for a good ideal, and cruelty to animals is never acceptable. But I disagree with them on this, for one key reason. It's not that I think poor old Phil should continue to be dragged from his burrow (or rather, the fake tree stump they pretend is his burrow) every Groundhog Day. Rather, I'm saying the whole practice of Groundhog Day should be retired.

I hear the collective gasp now. How could I possibly advocate ending Groundhog Day? Well, how much time do you have? Let me hit the main points. First of all, the most obvious complaint is the issue of relevance. It seems entirely appropriate for Phil to have "predicted" six more weeks of winter this year, or any other year for that matter. And do you know why we'll have six more weeks of winter? Because we actually have six more weeks of winter! No matter what, when Phil pops out of his fiberglass tree stump on February 2, there will still be a little over six weeks before the First Day of Spring. Way to go out on a limb, there, Philly-boy.

But, my sarcasm is directed unfairly at Phil, because really, he has nothing to do with it. I'm always just slightly irritated when they pull the rodent out of his hole, and then, after a brief "conversation" with Phil... they unfurl a piece of vellum from which they read Phil's prediction. So... I'm curious. Did Phil have a little typewriter down there with him, to prepare his words? Oh, I know, I bet it was an Underwood! Ahem.... Or, did Phil submit his prediction in advance, in which case, emerging from the hole on the 2nd has nothing to do with it - think of the scandal if the world learns the prediction is actually made on the - GASP - 1st of February! Talk about a bombshell - Tiger who?

Then again, of course the shadow-viewing couldn't actually take place when they say it does... because when they pull him out of his hole, it's usually around 6 or 7 AM, so the sun is barely up... the lighting when I see it on the news seems like you could never see a shadow, regardless, especially surrounded by all of those trees. So, does the shadow come from the lights erected by the various local news networks? If so, what if he see's that multi-shadow common when several lights are pointed at you from several different directions? If he sees 8 shadows, could we be in for another 48 weeks of winter (and the onset of a new ice age?)

It's kind of sad to think that the real answer is that a bunch of oddly-dressed Pennsylvania Dandies are just using Phil to not-so-cleverly disguise the mundane fact that they all know how to read the Farmer's Almanac.... (Coincidentally, the "Pennsylvania Dandies" were also the least-intimidating regiment in the Colonial Army. "Jebediah, is my tri-corn straight? Oh, fiddlesticks, I've been shot." Fun fact.) Honestly, this band of prolific purveyors of prognostication have come to look like something out of a Nicolas Cage movie... not the early, Leaving Las Vegas-era Cage. I'm talking post-Ghost Rider Cage, when things just started getting weird....

By the way, are we planning on replacing ALL of the forecasting groundhogs with robots? This year, there were no fewer than twenty-two different groundhogs throughout North America issuing predictions. Including ones named Dunkirk Dave and... ahem... Balzac Billy? Anyway, if ethical animal treatment is what you're after, it seems only fair to replace ALL of them, not just Phil. I'll warn you, however, if we do that, I can imagine a not-so-distant Orwellian future in which an army of robotic groundhogs become self-aware and try to take over the planet.

I suppose a robot wouldn't be that different from what they do now, it would just be a robot pretending to tell the weather rather than a real groundhog. The one who really holds the power will be whoever programs the robot with the desired "prediction." But it just won't feel right. Having a robot in charge of Groundhog Day is like having Jeff Zucker in charge of NBC. Sure, they serve their purpose, but it's the PROGRAMMING that matters.

I can't help but feel sorry for Phil. I was actually thrilled when he bit the guy who pulls him out of his "burrow" every year. That'll teach him. I mean, just put yourself in Phil's shoes. How would you feel to be ripped out of the bed in which you spend 364 days a year, shoved into a small box for an hour or so, then pulled out and waved in front of a crowd by a guy who, between the top hat, tiny glasses, and size 58 suit pants, looks disturbingly like a cross between John Goodman and Mr. Peanut. You'd be biting too!

I'll step off my soapbox for the time being. Let's just call this whole "Groundhog Day" thing to a close, shall we? Let Phil retire to live out the remainder of his days in peace. I'm not saying release him, because then every nut job and his uncle would be trying to find Phil in the wild. Just let him stay at his home at the library, and let Groundhog Day fade into one of those historical footnotes. The last thing we need is a robot predicting our weather... that's why God gave us Al Roker.