So the post office is in trouble? Big surprise. Has anyone been in a post office recently? They are horrible. I mean just horrible. Recently I went to the local Post Office to set up a PO Box. Why? Well I just moved and I will be doing it again in like 6 weeks. Instead of changing my address several times I figured this would be an easier. Oh how wrong I was. I stood in line there for 45 minutes. That's right nearly and hour and would have stood there longer had I not just said screw it and walked out. Oh did I mention that I didn't move in line that entire time. Yep, not a single person got helped and there were 3 people working. What these asshats were doing I'll never know. I will not be going back to a post office in the near future if ever! UPS and FedEx have basically already replaced the post office.
I rarely mail anything. I use my bank's bill pay to pay my bills. Text/phone/email to keep in touch with people. I honestly don't see the need for the Post office. I know we have to keep it there because there will be old people, like my grandparents, who still use it. It's like a business having to take checks for the older generation but I say eliminate most of them. Cut back to just delivering the mail to like Tuesday through Friday. Also tell the people working at them that if they can't get people through the line in a reasonable amount of time then they will find people who can.
The bottom line is the Post Office needs to get into the 21st Century or get left behind. I personally say leave them behind!
2011/01/24
2011/01/13
Censorship
[Note: I started this about 10 days ago]
About 10 years ago I used to rant and rave about censorship due to a certain organization called The Parent TV Council. For those of you who do not remember this horrible thing they basically went after any TV show they didn't feel was appropriate. They targeted shows like WWF programming, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, CSI and things like that. Now obviously the attack on the WWF is what drew my attention to it and it drove me insane! I have the right to do watch what I want and if someone else doesn't want to watch a show they have this amazing new device called a remote control. Or if you are still suck in the 50's, like the PTC, they have a nob on the set below the rabbit ears.
However things have gone from bad to worse recently. Oh before that let me talk briefly about cleanflixs or whatever that is called. If you are unaware of this it is a company that would 'clean' movies up. Taking out any violence, language, sex, or fun out of movie so it was family friendly. This was mostly in Utah, I believe, but I do know there was atleast one in Michigan down in Niles as well. This is wrong. If that is how the film makers wanted their film that is how they would have made it. Sometimes language or violence, and less often sex, are important parts of a film and the meaning or impact of a scene or entire film would be changed without it. It is just wrong.
As I say things have gone from bad to worse. Recently it was announced that a new version of Huck Finn was being released without a certain name for Jim. I WON'T use the word here. Part of me wants to....
Okay this is a different topic altogether. The word in question is a horrible word however it is used all the time. Rappers use it all the time. Friends use it to address each other. Take this story here. One man is fired for using the word in question when several others were not. It SHOULD NOT make a difference if the person is black, white, yellow, brown, purple or anything else. Yes I understand context before you say. However in a staff meeting talking ABOUT the word I would think that the word needs to used. It reminds me of Clerks 2 and the porch monkey thing....which is one of the funniest things I have ever seen. However in a professional environment if you fire one person for using it the others should be as well, in my opinion. I don't walk around saying honky to Paul at work because it is 'offensive' (well not to me but you get my idea). Its like saying it is okay for a fat person to call someone else fat...well I say that is okay all the time....hmmmm....but then again fat is not a 'bad' word. So there is no good example for this but I support the gentleman who was fired. What is good for the goose is good for the gander as the saying goes.
Anyway back to my original point of changing things and censorship. Huck Finn, which I HATED by the way, shouldn't be changed for any reason. It is a work of art and that shouldn't be changed. I don't see someone putting pants on the Statue of David (now that I said that someone will). If I am personally offended by say the use of religious overtones in the Narnia series are we going to see an edited version of that for atheist?
Unless the artist themselves decides to change whatever it is it should stay the way it is. If Stephen King decides that a clown is too scary and makes it a puppy instead that is okay but it isn't okay for people in twenty years to do it because clowns have all become psycho killers or they have become saints.
Let me just sum this up. Censorship is wrong. Extremely wrong. I have nothing else to say about this topic. To those who want to censor people...piss off!
About 10 years ago I used to rant and rave about censorship due to a certain organization called The Parent TV Council. For those of you who do not remember this horrible thing they basically went after any TV show they didn't feel was appropriate. They targeted shows like WWF programming, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, CSI and things like that. Now obviously the attack on the WWF is what drew my attention to it and it drove me insane! I have the right to do watch what I want and if someone else doesn't want to watch a show they have this amazing new device called a remote control. Or if you are still suck in the 50's, like the PTC, they have a nob on the set below the rabbit ears.
However things have gone from bad to worse recently. Oh before that let me talk briefly about cleanflixs or whatever that is called. If you are unaware of this it is a company that would 'clean' movies up. Taking out any violence, language, sex, or fun out of movie so it was family friendly. This was mostly in Utah, I believe, but I do know there was atleast one in Michigan down in Niles as well. This is wrong. If that is how the film makers wanted their film that is how they would have made it. Sometimes language or violence, and less often sex, are important parts of a film and the meaning or impact of a scene or entire film would be changed without it. It is just wrong.
As I say things have gone from bad to worse. Recently it was announced that a new version of Huck Finn was being released without a certain name for Jim. I WON'T use the word here. Part of me wants to....
Okay this is a different topic altogether. The word in question is a horrible word however it is used all the time. Rappers use it all the time. Friends use it to address each other. Take this story here. One man is fired for using the word in question when several others were not. It SHOULD NOT make a difference if the person is black, white, yellow, brown, purple or anything else. Yes I understand context before you say. However in a staff meeting talking ABOUT the word I would think that the word needs to used. It reminds me of Clerks 2 and the porch monkey thing....which is one of the funniest things I have ever seen. However in a professional environment if you fire one person for using it the others should be as well, in my opinion. I don't walk around saying honky to Paul at work because it is 'offensive' (well not to me but you get my idea). Its like saying it is okay for a fat person to call someone else fat...well I say that is okay all the time....hmmmm....but then again fat is not a 'bad' word. So there is no good example for this but I support the gentleman who was fired. What is good for the goose is good for the gander as the saying goes.
Anyway back to my original point of changing things and censorship. Huck Finn, which I HATED by the way, shouldn't be changed for any reason. It is a work of art and that shouldn't be changed. I don't see someone putting pants on the Statue of David (now that I said that someone will). If I am personally offended by say the use of religious overtones in the Narnia series are we going to see an edited version of that for atheist?
Unless the artist themselves decides to change whatever it is it should stay the way it is. If Stephen King decides that a clown is too scary and makes it a puppy instead that is okay but it isn't okay for people in twenty years to do it because clowns have all become psycho killers or they have become saints.
Let me just sum this up. Censorship is wrong. Extremely wrong. I have nothing else to say about this topic. To those who want to censor people...piss off!
2011/01/10
Enough already!
Okay I've had ENOUGH! No more damn it! What am I talking about? The use of 9/11. 9/11 was a damn tragedy there is no doubt about that. It is something that SHOULDN'T have happened if we didn't have thousands of layers in the government. But that doesn't matter because what is done is done. What pisses me off is the use of 9/11 for gains politically or otherwise.
The last straw was last night when I heard about the shooting in Arizona. I went over to CNN to get some information about it and it mentioned the 9 year old who was shot. What was strange was they made sure to mention she was born on 9/11/01. I don't see what that has to do with ANYTHING! If she was born on 8/21/01 would that even have been mentioned? Of course it wouldn't have been! But because she was born on 9/11 it is suddenly significant. Then driving to work I hear Glenn Beck talking about how this is significant that she was born on 9/11. It isn't!
Now I am not trying to take away from another horrible incident. The fact that these people were killed for NOTHING is tragic. However the fact that they are using 9/11 to make this more powerful is disgusting.
9/11 has nothing to do with this. As far as the information out there I can't even find that this is politically motivated. Right now, and I assume we will find out, that this was just the act of a madman. To blame ANYONE, be it Sarah Palin and her 'crosshairs hitlist' or Glenn Beck or whoever, is just dangerous and wrong. That could lead other unbalanced people, if that is the reason for this shooting, to do the same thing in the other direction.
Right now all that matters is that 6 people, including a young 9 year old, are dead and several are hanging on in critical condition. To the people turning this into a political arena you should all be ashamed of yourselves.
Lastly its time for this country to stop using 9/11 as an excuse for everything. For a reason that everything has happened. For the reason that anything WILL happen. 9/11 should not be forgotten but also shouldn't be used all the time either. As the King of Harts would say, Enough is enough....
The last straw was last night when I heard about the shooting in Arizona. I went over to CNN to get some information about it and it mentioned the 9 year old who was shot. What was strange was they made sure to mention she was born on 9/11/01. I don't see what that has to do with ANYTHING! If she was born on 8/21/01 would that even have been mentioned? Of course it wouldn't have been! But because she was born on 9/11 it is suddenly significant. Then driving to work I hear Glenn Beck talking about how this is significant that she was born on 9/11. It isn't!
Now I am not trying to take away from another horrible incident. The fact that these people were killed for NOTHING is tragic. However the fact that they are using 9/11 to make this more powerful is disgusting.
9/11 has nothing to do with this. As far as the information out there I can't even find that this is politically motivated. Right now, and I assume we will find out, that this was just the act of a madman. To blame ANYONE, be it Sarah Palin and her 'crosshairs hitlist' or Glenn Beck or whoever, is just dangerous and wrong. That could lead other unbalanced people, if that is the reason for this shooting, to do the same thing in the other direction.
Right now all that matters is that 6 people, including a young 9 year old, are dead and several are hanging on in critical condition. To the people turning this into a political arena you should all be ashamed of yourselves.
Lastly its time for this country to stop using 9/11 as an excuse for everything. For a reason that everything has happened. For the reason that anything WILL happen. 9/11 should not be forgotten but also shouldn't be used all the time either. As the King of Harts would say, Enough is enough....
2011/01/05
Apocalypse of the Dead review
I recently finished my latest zombie book, Apocalypse of the Dead by Joe McKinney. Let me start off by saying this is sort of a sequel to Dead City. It is in the same world after Dead City but you wouldn't have to read Dead City to understand or get this one. In fact this book is much MUCH better.
Overall I would rate this book a 3.5 out of 5. At first I did not like it. Then I did. Then I loved it. Then I shook my head at it. Overall the book follows four groups through zombie breakout. One group from within the dead zone (not the phrase they use in the book but I can't remember the one they use). Another from Florida. One from LA and one from the Big Easy I believe.
I almost think that Joe couldn't decide what kind of book he wanted to read as it goes through several different writing styles throughout.
It has several twists and turns that one would not expect and several you can see coming a mile away.
The writing style is simple yet affective. I found this decent story telling till the end where things made little sense to me. It was similar to a movie that has a decent first act, the second act is AMAZING, and then the ending has you thinking...wait...that's it?
The story itself is, as I said, following four groups throughout the outbreak. As you can expect slowly the four groups meet up and worlds collide. Along the way each group has it's own problems that include being stuck in the dead zone, having a group of bikers after them, being old with kids and a prisoner and being part of a religious group. Oh and throw in a young man who has a special power and you've got an interesting group of characters.
I enjoyed things till the ending where several characters disappeared completely. Several subplots also seemed to disappear. I wonder if they hurried the process to have it come out during the Halloween holiday.
Those problems aside it was a much better book than Dead City. I would say if you enjoy zombies its a good book but not anything to put at the top of the pile. Since I no longer feel obligated to being a company shill here is the ISBN. 9780786023592.
Up next I am going to read Mick Foley's latest book Countdown to Lockdown.
2011/01/02
Scott Pilgrim review
I finally got a chance to see Scott Pilgrim vs. the World this evening. First off let me say that I didn't love it. Nope. It wasn't horrible but I didn't enjoy it as much as I thought. Honestly I would have shut it off within the first half if I had something else to do. I am glad I didn't as it did pick up.
I won't go into the story much as it is basically Michael Cera playing the same character he does in every movie (type casting much?) having to defeat the 7 evil ex's of his new girlfriend.
Honestly at first it was extremely annoying and as I said I really wanted to shut it off. The acting was annoying as shit and I wanted to kill myself. The only person in this movie that didn't annoy me was Kieran Culkin who I thought was great throughout the film.
After the first half hour I found myself enjoying it more. The movie picked up speed at this point. One weird thing was all the 'cameos' in the flick as most of Ramona's ex's were famous people. I don't know if you can call them cameos or not but it was still strange although I once again liked Brandon Routh who has been really good in everything he has done but Superman...boy was that an awful movie...anyway.
Overall I would recommend the movie but don't pay attention to the first 4th or so. Also I would have liked to see someone besides Cera play the main character. I honestly think an unknown would have been the way to go. Cera was distracting throughout and personally made the movie slightly less enjoyable. Not as much as Death Race 2's main actor but slightly.
Overall I would say 2.75 losing .25 for Cera and his usual lack of acting ability. Sorry but its true Michael, you aren't much of an actor in my opinion. Maybe I shouldn't blame Michael as I have enjoyed some of his films but look at this movie and his character in Juno. Pretty similar. But then again it isn't his fault that he is the same character as he didn't write them but still not a fan of his in this flick.
Not a movie I would watch a second time but worth checking out. Oh and it would be wrong not to mention the fact that all the young ladies in this film are very attractive. Just saying!
I won't go into the story much as it is basically Michael Cera playing the same character he does in every movie (type casting much?) having to defeat the 7 evil ex's of his new girlfriend.
Honestly at first it was extremely annoying and as I said I really wanted to shut it off. The acting was annoying as shit and I wanted to kill myself. The only person in this movie that didn't annoy me was Kieran Culkin who I thought was great throughout the film.
After the first half hour I found myself enjoying it more. The movie picked up speed at this point. One weird thing was all the 'cameos' in the flick as most of Ramona's ex's were famous people. I don't know if you can call them cameos or not but it was still strange although I once again liked Brandon Routh who has been really good in everything he has done but Superman...boy was that an awful movie...anyway.
Overall I would recommend the movie but don't pay attention to the first 4th or so. Also I would have liked to see someone besides Cera play the main character. I honestly think an unknown would have been the way to go. Cera was distracting throughout and personally made the movie slightly less enjoyable. Not as much as Death Race 2's main actor but slightly.
Overall I would say 2.75 losing .25 for Cera and his usual lack of acting ability. Sorry but its true Michael, you aren't much of an actor in my opinion. Maybe I shouldn't blame Michael as I have enjoyed some of his films but look at this movie and his character in Juno. Pretty similar. But then again it isn't his fault that he is the same character as he didn't write them but still not a fan of his in this flick.
Not a movie I would watch a second time but worth checking out. Oh and it would be wrong not to mention the fact that all the young ladies in this film are very attractive. Just saying!
2011/01/01
Death Race 2 movie Review
Good morning everyone and welcome to another movie review. Last night I watched the sequel...or prequel...not sure which, to the 2008 action film remake of Death Race. This one stars Sean Bean, Ving Rhames, Tanit Phoenix and the debut of the character of Lists played by Frederick Koehler who is in the 2008 film. Also you have the return of 14K played by Robin Shou from the 2008 film as well.
Now my first question when I started this movie was "why is Sean Bean in this movie?". Now the reason I sequel or prequel is because its hard to tell. It is called Death Race 2 but it actually takes place before the 2008 film. The idea of the movie is that Carl Lucas (played by Luke Goss...who is the star but billed sixth for some reason) is a thug who works for Markus Kane (Sean Bean) blows a bank job and ends up in prison. Kane, who runs a major crime organization needs him dead. In the prison they have what they call "Death Match" which is really a mix between UFC, American Gladiators and the old Roman Gladiators fights where two men walk in and only one walks out. I won't say anymore about the plot but I think you get the idea.
This movie was one of those where I thought "How long is this? It has been going on forever" and it was only a half hour in. However the second half was quicker. To me the only people who come off looking decent were Ving and Sean, big surprise huh? Luke Goss was HORRIBLE in this. I mean horrible. He came off as a poor mans poor mans, or third generation copy, Jason Statham. He was probably cast because he kinda sorta looks like Statham. But honestly his performance might be one of the worst ones I've seen in a long time in a film. After a little research into Mr. Goss I saw nothing on his resume to make me think that this was just a fluke performance and he is actually better than this. I don't mean to come down so hard on Mr. Goss but he really made the film quite a bit worse and brought it down. Honestly I think my fat ass could have done better. Sorry Mr. Goss but you were horrible.
With Mr. Goss's performance aside I enjoyed the flick as Kevin Smith would say. Is it a master piece like say Saving Private Ryan of course not. I knew it was going to be a dumb action flick with bad dialog and probably decent to action segments. If you enjoyed the first one or want to know how Death Race (the fictional game show in the movie's universe) its worth watching. If you want to watch a stupid action flick watch this. If you want something amazing I would avoid this one. If I had to give a rating probably 1.5 out of 4. If there was a better star it would have gotten higher but as I said Goss just sucked everything out of the film. Much like the late Andrew Martin (Pro Wrestler Test for those of you who don't know) he was the black hole of charisma in the movie.
Until next time guys. Remember, its a new dawn and its a new day.
Now my first question when I started this movie was "why is Sean Bean in this movie?". Now the reason I sequel or prequel is because its hard to tell. It is called Death Race 2 but it actually takes place before the 2008 film. The idea of the movie is that Carl Lucas (played by Luke Goss...who is the star but billed sixth for some reason) is a thug who works for Markus Kane (Sean Bean) blows a bank job and ends up in prison. Kane, who runs a major crime organization needs him dead. In the prison they have what they call "Death Match" which is really a mix between UFC, American Gladiators and the old Roman Gladiators fights where two men walk in and only one walks out. I won't say anymore about the plot but I think you get the idea.
This movie was one of those where I thought "How long is this? It has been going on forever" and it was only a half hour in. However the second half was quicker. To me the only people who come off looking decent were Ving and Sean, big surprise huh? Luke Goss was HORRIBLE in this. I mean horrible. He came off as a poor mans poor mans, or third generation copy, Jason Statham. He was probably cast because he kinda sorta looks like Statham. But honestly his performance might be one of the worst ones I've seen in a long time in a film. After a little research into Mr. Goss I saw nothing on his resume to make me think that this was just a fluke performance and he is actually better than this. I don't mean to come down so hard on Mr. Goss but he really made the film quite a bit worse and brought it down. Honestly I think my fat ass could have done better. Sorry Mr. Goss but you were horrible.
With Mr. Goss's performance aside I enjoyed the flick as Kevin Smith would say. Is it a master piece like say Saving Private Ryan of course not. I knew it was going to be a dumb action flick with bad dialog and probably decent to action segments. If you enjoyed the first one or want to know how Death Race (the fictional game show in the movie's universe) its worth watching. If you want to watch a stupid action flick watch this. If you want something amazing I would avoid this one. If I had to give a rating probably 1.5 out of 4. If there was a better star it would have gotten higher but as I said Goss just sucked everything out of the film. Much like the late Andrew Martin (Pro Wrestler Test for those of you who don't know) he was the black hole of charisma in the movie.
Until next time guys. Remember, its a new dawn and its a new day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)