Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Employed!
Light Reading
Nobody Said We Were Remotely Competent
Lo and behold, said shiny new disc drive isn't exactly "attached" to anything, and doesn't so much "function" as "fucking piss me off." I call Best Buy, ask the guy if he can do something (right), and whether it can be taken care of in the store. He says sure, probably. (Read: Hell no, you naive little bastard) I take it in, the guy says assweasel installed it, then apparently forgot to check to see if it was working. The solution? Send it back to assweasel, and this time explicitly request that he quote "Does his fucking job." Actually, the service order didn't say that. But the guy who wrote it up did point out that he didn't include any four-letter words, though in my position he would have liked to. And there is a rush order on it, so maybe (right) I can get it back within a week, before school starts and I have to get out my paleozoic stone tablets for taking notes.
And it better, because there's only so long I can keep the machetes at bay.
Saturday, August 26, 2006
Get Down Wit' Yo Bad Self
Let's put it all on the table, and let the haters take notes. The guy's got a massive pet snake who kills on command. Snakes, dude. Hsssss. He's got a group of minions who walk around in pimptastic black cloaks and pointy hats to do all of his bidding. He's got a giant image of a skull and snake in the sky cast up in the sky for whenever he's ridin' dirty. It's like the bat signal, only...not. And just the mention of his name sends people running back to the underwear drawer for a clean pair. Don't knock it, that's hot.
So go on, Lord Voldemort, brush ya shoulders off. And to the rest of y'all, don't hate, and don't judge. To paraphrase another piece of classic literature, "Let he who is without sin and doesn't kill innocent people by the thousands cast the first stone."
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
Ssssspectacular
Snakes on a Plane
There comes a decisive moment in every movie, one where either you feel like the show has failed to meet your expectations, or you realize you’re going to leave the theater satisfied. Thankfully, the latter was true of Snakes on a Plane, and the moment of satisfaction came when, after the plane was deluged by hundreds of squirmy, slithery, vicious snakes, one absolutely giant motherfucker (read: Boss Snake) gets on the scene, slowly coils the full length of its body around some hapless dude in his seat, then proceeds to wrap its mouth around the guy’s head, and swallow it whole. (And I apologize for those of you who haven’t seen it and didn’t want to be spoiled, but it’s your own damn fault for missing the opening.) As if I hadn’t already gotten the memo, this moment officially declared Snakes on a Plane to be one badass movie.
Surprisingly, it wasn’t just a “so bad it’s good” type of show. Sure, there were plenty of elements of that. One can never fully escape the straight-up re-fucking-diculous premise of the movie entirely. Plus, some of the snake attacks are more aimed at being funny than frightening, which lends to the cheese effect. But overall, the movie lacked the requisite god-awful dialogue to be a “so bad it’s good” picture. It mostly came across as being unabashedly impossible, but endlessly entertaining.
For example, there were a lot of genuinely funny moments. They even took one joke straight from the MZRM firm (“You people?”), and you’ve got to give props for that. It also had some nicely quirky yet believable characters. Plus, some of the snake attacks were frickin’ wicked. There’s always that feeling one could jump out at any moment, and sometimes they did. One of those moments had me practically on an ejector seat, I jumped so damn high. And then there were the side-effects of the snake attacks. I hadn’t even considered that issue beforehand. Some were pretty gruesome, others just cool. Especially when intentionally awful characters suffer hilariously horrific deaths at the hands of dozens of snakes.
There were only a couple things that disappointed me. I love Sam Jackson, and there were plenty of good Sam Jackson moments here. But I would have liked a few more. Particularly that he should have gotten to fight the Boss Snake. I mean, come on - - who wouldn’t want to see Samuel L vs. a 20 foot python in a climactic battle? That’s worth the price of admission alone.
There’s always the nagging question of “What the fuck?” that plagues any attempts at logic, of course. But you’ve gotta let that slide now and then. Bottom line – I hyped this movie all summer, and it pretty much delivered the goods, which is a tremendous feat. So don’t hate.
Seriously, dude. Snakes. Hsssss.
My score: A-
Recommendation: Fuck yeah.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Best of Both Worlds
Essentially, you take the perfect chocolate cookie flavor and the cream contrast, then splash it with a cool mint, and dunk it in milk. Then try not to die/blow your load from sheer awesomeness overload.
Witness as the indomitable mint creme oreos surround and overwhelm an inferior regular double stuf Oreo.
(One cavaet -- these are not to be used in constructing the mythical Ochos. The subspecies Ochi are an entity unto themselves, and shall not be subject to any dangerous genetic engineering.)
Then after discovering this veritable cornucopia of mint-chocolate fantasticality, Kristin and I bore witness to more impending greatness: the greatest (read: badassest) actor of our generation, Mr. Samuel L. "Yes they deserved to die, and I hope they burn in hell!" Jackson, who gave an interview to Jon Stewart on the Daily Show last night. The subject, of course, was:
They showed a short clip, which, while eating the aforementioned heavenly mint oreo concoction, just about caused us to lose our collective shit. It was basically Sam Jackson standing in the aisle of a plane, surrounded by a few frightenend passengers. With his usual cool-yet-pissed-off-and-dangerous grimace, Sam declares himself to be sick of the snakes on this plane. However, in true Sam fashion, he incorporates the word "motherfucking" roughly twelve additional times in what is normally an eight word sentence.
Opening night of the best terrible movie ever made is this Friday, August 18. If you are anywhere else that night, you do not deserve to live.
All of which only confirms my suspicions: best summer EVER.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Thursday, August 10, 2006
There's Nothing Wrong With Me
Fuck you, tapeworm.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Just a Question
Monday, August 07, 2006
Lawyers Aren't People
Now, most of us probably don't actually say those things (I'm looking at everyone but you, Mad Dog), but even feeling the urge to say them kinda makes us bad people. Same thing with dealing with a client (or defendants, in my case) who feel the need to give you their entire frickin' life story when asked to spell their last name. We deal with legal matters; we listen for a few certain things of legal significance, and every extraneous word out of their mouth is doused with gasoline and dropped in the burn pile. So it takes a great deal of patience to learn how to deal with people. I hesitate to say "common" people or "lay" people; I'd call them "real" people, because what the hell have we done? We haven't been anywhere, we haven't done anything. We've read some books, we've listened to some crackpots, and now we are the collective shit. I try to remember these things if at all possible.
Then I get handed a pro se appellate brief, and I'm asked to begin crafting a response. Every bit of humility I try grasping to goes right out the window, and the thunderbolts start flying. Seriously, it took me an hour to read this thing - probably 40 pages long - because I had to pause for outbursts of laughter, as well as jotting down the particularly ingenious (read: bafflingly nonsensical) arguments. Quite a few of the words used are so advanced, they don't even exist yet. You tell me, what is "vertitude?" Also, what does it mean to "perservorate?" Apparently it's pretty compelling, because after using it once, the guy comes back to it, and describes one of the judge's actions with the adverb "perservoratively." I thought maybe this was a fictional outgrowth of "perservere" for a moment, but no, contextually that really wouldn't work.
Then there's the legalese. Holy mother of god, this had me rolling on the floor. Think of the worst attempts by a lay person of using inflated legalese you've ever heard, and then picture a 40 page brief containing nothing but this type of crap. He refers to phone calls as "telephonic verbalizations;" he always uses "necessitates" and "utilizes" rather than "needs" or "uses;" he always goes the extra mile and throws in extra syllables, even if the word no longer makes sense in context, and even if it is, in fact, no longer a word. Some other choice phrases -- "...that he had indeed per his own admission intentionally earlier varied his speed..." "Such unprovable misinformation he had initially formfit into his written rendition..." and "Translating such a visual cartographic diagram into a written paradigm will require extrapolation." (I like this one - much more loftier than saying "the picture will require explanation.")
I'd imagine the Court of Appeals has to enjoy wading through all the nonsense while trying to find actual legal argument, because I know I sure did. In fact, this was the guy's second submission. As in, the court rejected his first one, asked him to write a new brief that conforms to the rules of appellate briefs, and this is his revised version. I'm told his first one was even worse. Basically, his argument is an extremely slanted retelling of the facts, where he depicts the police officer as a liar, and the other witness as a liar, and asks the court to dismiss the case. Well, there are any number of things wrong with that, including a) appellate courts don't make factual findings, b) appellate courts don't judge credibility of witnesses, c) the second witness didn't even testify, because the case was so strong they didn't need him, d) the court wouldn't simply dismiss the case. There are any number of technical problems with the brief, not to mention the fact that there are simply zero legal arguments, with zero citations to actual legal authority.
So rather than drafting a response, I drafted a motion to dismiss, or alternatively forcing him to submit a new one that complies with...oh, let's say, ANY of the guidelines. My motion points out all of the problems with his brief, and why we can't legitimately be asked to form a response. I tried to temper the thunderbolts; the motion could really have been much harsher than it turned out. I was really tempted to use Easterbrook's line "Ten weasels are no more persuasive than one," but I left it out. (Well...I left it in a paragraph I didn't use; Eric is the lead attorney on the case, and knowing him, this line might end up in the final version anyway.)
I don't mean to knock pro se appellants. They have the right to have their cases heard just as much as anybody. And sometimes they have legitimate reasons for being unrepresented. But there are reasons we have guidelines that everyone is supposed to follow, including pro se appellants. Attempting to snow the Court of Appeals is a waste of everyone's time. The bottom line is, if you're an idiot, you're still going to sound like an idiot, no matter what length of words you use.
In this type of situation, I'd almost feel okay using the phrase, "Now, I'm not trying to sound superior - - I just am..."
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
You Should Be Shot in the Face
For example, I've been working on a child abuse/neglect case lately, with a couple of parents who fit this description. For starters, they name their children like absolute morons - their four names are Ahieden, Taneekja, Jazzmine, and something else equally ridiculous. This may be horribly stereotypical, but I'll still assert its truth -- parents willing to butcher the language to create names which they consider clever or distinctive are generally poor and uneducated, and their children are pretty much condemned to the same life.
But that's horribly unfair, right? Nah, dog. Here's how much they care about their children. They leave rotting food, dishes, alcohol bottles, drugs, a loaded BB gun, cigarette butts, and tattooing needles all over their floor. Police once found maggots in the baby's crib. The children are always dirty; when the cops arrived once, they found the kids covered head to toe in various food substances, and one had tattoo ink all around her mouth, because she had been trying to drink it. And oh yeah -- they NEVER do laundry. NEVER. Once a concerned neighbor decided to do laundry for them, and it took twenty loads to clean all of their clothes, which had not been cleaned a single time after use.
Then we've got all the documented instances of abuse and neglect. 1) The father tieing a string around the little boy's pants, then telling him to run. When the boy runs, the father yanks on the string, causing him to fall over. He does this repeatedly. 2) The father pours alcohol into a sippy cup, then tells the boy to drink it, because its juice. The boy doesn't want it; the father makes him drink it. The boy spits it out and starts crying. 3) The father repeatedly opens up this cookie jar shaped like a lion, which roars. Each time it frightens the boy. The father follows him around the room, continually opening this cookie jar, until the boy bursts into tears, and runs away. The father laughs about this to his friends in the room, then tracks him down and continues to do this. These three I witnessed on a home video tape. There are plenty of other incidents witnessed by others.
Then there's the incident which was before the court presently. The little boy had a seizure and almost died. His sister said that the father stepped on his head to quiet him, then later kicked him in the groin because he was reaching for his diaper. The little boy vomited, then had a seizure. The doctors confirmed it happend from a blunt trauma to the groin.
But here's the kicker - we can't convict this fucker. The only witness is the little girl, who is too young and nervous to be reliable for court, so her testimony won't be admitted. The DA has me going over the "other acts" evidence to show intent, plan, absence of mistake, etc, to use as supplemental evidence. The motion's not going to pass, and it probably shouldn't, because its completely prejudicial. So essentially, there's no hard evidence against this guy, and he's going to walk. He and his wife are going to continue tormenting these children, because that's their prerogative as parents. They can have the children live in filth. They can treat them like animals. And, if need be, they can physically abuse them, as long as no one is watching. Right up until one of the children gets killed, when it will be too late.
So here's to you, scum of the earth. I suggest you get down on your filthy knees and thank whatever god you pray to that vigilante justice is illegal. Because if it wasn't, I'd greet you both at your next court date with a sawed-off shotgun and a smile.
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Role Model
Here's a prime example. Today he showed me a letter he received from a defense attorney regarding a tape recording for events that took place in an intoxilyzer room. The defense attorney, who Eric knew to be a pretty good guy, sent a letter indicating that the sound on the tape had been dubbed at an extremely high speed, so that all the people involved sounded like chipmunks. The attorney stated that he did not speak chipmunk, so he was requesting the DA's office to send another tape with the audio at a correct speed.
Eric showed me this letter, then the letter he sent in response. It stated that his tape had the same problem, and that he had also noticed that the people involved sounded like chipmunks. This confirmed a suspicion of his that the defendants were, in fact, chipmunks. In addition, he (Eric) happens to speak a little chipmunk, and that what the defendant was saying on the tape was "I am guilty. I am guilty. I am guilty."
EDIT: Eric sent the letters to the police department, along with the request for new tapes. Clearly, they got a laugh out of it. The lady that returned the new tapes affixed stickers of Alvin, Simon, and Theodore to the plastic case, and labelled it "Eric and the Chipmunks."
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Sometimes You've Just Got To....
So that's how I spent my yesterday, and it was pretty sweet. It was an OWI first offense, so it was non-criminal. The guy had already lost on the refusal hearing, which actually has a higher penalty than anything he'd face from losing the OWI, but he was wealthy and he hired a top-shelf OWI defense attorney to fight it. Apparently the guy does a lot of business in Illinios, where they don't count our refusals as prior convictions. So this trial didn't mean much in WI, but it was important for the FIBs. So, we decided to win this for the dirty FIBs.
The case itself looked solid, but was kinda sketchy once we really got into it. We didn't have a BAC because of the refusal, and the cop didn't force a blood draw since it was only a civil charge. But the refusal itself was weak, because the guy was blowing into the intoximeter, then had to stop and inhale, then blow some more, which never gave a sufficient sample. So it was hard to tell whether he was really trying or not. The defense attorney had fun arguing that, and the fact that we didn't have a test result, and the fact that the officer didn't force a blood test when he could have.
I got to do the entire thing, from Voir Dire to closings. I also filed a last minute Motion in Limine, which we handled at the beginning. I wanted to argue it, but the judge specifically asked my supervisor a question on it, so he just handled the argument. I had thought the case was strong enough with the evidence we wanted to admit (the act of refusing a PBT), so I wasn't going to file it. But then I had some free time on Friday and thought what the hell. It was a damn good thing too, because that helped establish a pattern which made the other evidence look stronger.
Overall, my performance was pretty solid. My opening was a little stiff compared to the other attorney, who was animated and personable. The direct exam of the officer was good, I had easily 100 questions or so, but the defense attorney called a lot of it into question. The cross of the defendant wasn't that strong, because they explained away a lot of things I wanted to ask. But the closing arguments were great. By this time I was more comfortable, and I gave a pretty kickass closing. The defense guy also gave a good one, and included some story about how field sobriety tests are like carnival games, designed to make people fail. I got to give a rebuttal, and this was all off the cuff by now. So I said that the tests aren't designed to make people fail, they're designed to make drunk people fail - - people who can't follow simple directions or stand up without falling over, people who shouldn't be driving a car. All in all, pretty strong.
The jury went out for 40 minutes (it was a 6 person jury), then came back with the verdict. No one was all that concerned with the verdict, because they already had the refusal, and we don't care much about the FIBs, to be honest. This was more of just a no pressure case, which would be cool to win. But I cared about the verdict, you can bet your sweet ass.
The jury came back, and it was a unanimous guilty verdict. It was all I could do to keep from standing up Josh Lyman style and saying "Victory is mine! I have drunk from the keg of glory! Bring me all the finest muffins and bagels in all the land." But I just smiled politely instead.
Awesome experience, let me tell you. It was in a very relaxed court with a pretty informal judge, the defense attorney was actually a pretty cool guy, and my parents and one of my grandmothers showed up for the first half. I had a hella good time.
One word: Undefeated.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Unpublish This
Fucking unpublished cases.
(Points to genitals)
Monday, July 17, 2006
Ridin' Dirty
As with any sort of textual interpretation, you need to start with the context. The chorus repeats the phrase "They tryin' to catch me ridin' dirty." This begs the question, who are "they?" My initial suspicions on this were correct - - "they" in this context refers to police officers. I've included an appendix with a link to the lyrics; note the word "patrolling" in the chorus, which almost certainly refers to Five-0. For further evidence, Chamillionaire discusses in his first verse how police are trying to see him "lean" - - I believe "lean" as used presently means leaning to the side and scoping out the scene, contemplating any criminal activity that may arise, and potentially for bitches and/or hos.
Essentially, "ridin dirty" refers to getting one's ride on - - hustling, if you will. The word "dirty" evinces a criminal aspect to said hustling. Indeed, Chamillionaire implies that such conduct by the police officers constitutes racial profiling. Peep these lyrics from verse three:
"So they get behind me tryin to check my tags, look at my rearview and they smilin
Thinkin they'll catch me on the wrong well keep tryin
Cause they denyin is racial profiling"
Chamillionaire is essentially bemoaning the attempts by police to arrest him and his fellow ballers for living in luxury, driving expensive cars, bumping their music at excessively high volumes, rocking fly gold chains/rings/teeth, and getting freaky with aforementioned bitches and/or hos. And while some of Chamillionaire's activities may be intrinsically against the law, he feels needlessly hated on. Ultimately, "Ridin" serves as a scathing social commentary, where the artist rails against the law enforcement of a society that neither understands nor appreciates the work Cha puts in while on the grind.
So there you have it. Now you and your friends can accurately characterize the type of ridin' you're engaging in at any given time. If there are any other questions I can answer, feel free to send them my way. And in the mean time, try not to get caught ridin' dirty.
Appendix A:
"I was looking for context clues, like I learned from Reading Rainbow..."
- The quote, or very nearly the quote, used by Kristin to describe her attempts at discerning the meaning behind "Ridin' dirty."
Appendix B:
"Ridin"(Chamillionaire feat. Krayzie Bone)
Word.
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Chicago's Finest
The other penis stories weren't as funny, but there were two other stories about these renegade cops. The next story I'd dedicate to Andy. The cops knew that one particular subway was rife with pickpockets. So they set up a guy pretending to sleep, with his watch and other items sticking out. A pickpocket passed by, grabbed the items, and took off running. The sleeper stood up and shouted, then radioed the suspect in. What the suspect didn't know was that the cops had another officer waiting - he was absolutely huge, like a bodybuilder, and very tall. He was waiting behind another wall, where the cops had loosened the hinges on a door. And --- he was dressed as Superman. So the suspect runs toward this wall, and all the sudden the officer kicks down this door, steps out in his superman gear, grabs and lifts the suspect into the air, and lets him dangle there for awhile. The cops arrive quickly, and Supercop then hands the suspect over to the officers. Then, at trial, the suspect says he wasn't caught by the cops, he was caught by Superman. He was later referred for a psych evaluation.
And finally, the cops had been investigating this warehouse where robbers had been storing stolen merchandise for a long time. So one night the cops disable all the lights in the warehouse, and wait for the guys to return. That night the robbers came back with more stuff, and found all the lights out in the warehouse. So they got out their flashlights and crept through the building, until they came upon something unusual - one of the cops had dressed up as Wolfman, in full wolf costume with a mask and hair and fangs. He was crouched on some shelf like 8 feet off the ground, and as soon as they saw him he started snarling, then leaped down at them. Other cops, who were positioned elsewhere to watch, described it as the funniest thing they ever saw - all the sudden the flashlights clatter to the ground and the robbers took off screaming. One ran directly into a large metal pole and knocked himself unconscious.
Of course, they're not allowed to do stuff like that anymore. But still, the fact that someone can take law enforcement and have fun with it - - that's just fantastic, and something to aspire to.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Trivial
The Rules:
A. Pick 11 of your favorite movies.
B. Then pick one of your favorite quotes from each movie.
C. Post the quotes on your blog.
D. Have commenters guess what the movie is.
E. Place the guesser's user ndirectly after the quote.
F. Extra points for knowing the actor and/or character's name.
The Quotes:
1. "I wasn’t aware Nazi Camp got out til 8. What did you do, skip arts and crafts?"
"Yes, I did."
Dodgeball - Peter LaFleur (Vince Vaughn) - identified by Kristin. Although, you should mention the retort was by White Goodman (Ben Stiller). That's what really makes the quote.
2. "Enhance. Enhance. Enhance."
Supertroopers - Ramathorn (Jay Chandrasomething) - identified by Andy
3. "I'm a monster. What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done."
Serenity - the Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor) - identified by Andy
4. "It's like wiping your arse with silk. I love it."
Matrix: Reloaded - the Merovingian (Lambert Wilson) - identified by Tortceaser
5. "A vigilante is just a man lost in the scramble for his own gratification. He can be destroyed, or locked up; but if you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal, and if they can't stop you, you become something else entirely."
Batman Begins - Ducard (Liam Neeson) - identified by Tortceaser
6. "They're your clothes, motherfucker."
Pulp Fiction - Jules (Samuel L Jackson) - identified by Tortceaser
7. "So here I am - standing in your doorway. I have always been standing in your doorway. Isn't it about time somebody saved your life?"
Spiderman 2 - Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) - identified by Kristin
8. "I’m going to my room, where it’s not so…(looking at stepdad)…I don’t know…stupid."
Big Trouble - Jenny Herk (Zooey Deschanel) - identified by X-Tina
9. "Yeah, well I'm taller."
Speed - Jack Traven (Keanu Reeves) identified by Johnny Utah
- FYI - this is also my preferred line of choice after decapitating my enemies
10. "You are a god among insects. Never let anyone tell you different."
X-Men 2 - Magneto (Ian McKellen) - identified by Andy, though much later than I would have figured
11. "Technically, it's a ferret."
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - Alastor Moody [actually Barty Crouch Jr] (Brendan Gleeson) - identified by Kristin
Bonus, just for fun:
12. "No way. Why should I change? He's the one who sucks."
Office Space - Michael Bolton (David Herman) - identified by Andy
13. "Yippie-ki-yay, motherfucker!"
Die Hard - John McClane (Bruce Willis) - identified by Tortceaser
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
Your Move, Funkmaster
But then hope arrived in the form of a $350 check which I hadn't been expecting for a month yet. Long story short, I said fuck everything, and exchanged my phone for the RAZR. This makes me the third member of MZRM to rock the RAZR, which I'd say makes it the official phone of the firm that takes badassery to a whole new level, and then thrashes its ass with an electric spike whip. This leaves you, Utah. Not that I bought it because thats what all the cool people are doing. I bought it because it was the only one that really stood out from the other new phones, except for one that had a weird sliding feature. The problem was the keys were still exposed; not a big deal, but I don't want to mess around with keyguard. Having to lock and unlock the keys every time I need to make a call takes away precious seconds, and every second counts when you absolutely need to call everyone to tell them about Utah's latest showdown/robbing by/robbing of/fistfight with a homeless person and/or racoon, or you covertly dial Madd0g's phone just to hear your own ringtone going off.
I've gotta say, this purchase feels pretty good. I don't usually go all out with accessories and top of the line personal items, but I put some thought into it -- I only get a phone every two years. It should be a major step up each time, right? Why get something that's just marginally better than the last one? And then there's the simple fact that I was too good for the first new phone. Hence, RAZR, which is very possibly too good for me.
Now, to hook up some tones. The question becomes this: which of you wants their personal ringer to be "Pimp Juice" by Nelly?
Sunday, July 02, 2006
For What it Is
This is a line often heard when people's opinions about movies differ drastically. Same movie, two completely different reactions.
For those of you who've read Andy's post about Superman, I too attended the advanced screening of Superman Returns last week. As his post indicates, Andy felt it was possibly one of the greatest movies ever made. While I really enjoyed the movie overall, I walked away feeling a little disappointed. I couldn't put my finger on any one thing; the action scenes were phenomenal, especially the flying; the actors were pretty good, especially Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor; the themes of regret and resposibility came across beautifully; and the story...well, other than the actual dastardly plot itself (he was growing a flippin' continent!), the story was also passable. (Ok, side rant, the continent thing? Lex had these super crystals; story-wise, the writers could have come up with any number of awesome possibilities for what he could do with those crystals. But growing a continent?? Um....rrrright.) Alright, rant over. I'm generally willing to overlook a silly plot for an entertaining story, so that didn't detract too much.
But somehow I just didn't see it as a spectacular cinematic achievement like Andy. I even had to stifle a little laughter when he said it was a near-religious experience for him. Apparently I was missing something.
And I was, most definitely. Not something about the movie itself. I was missing his perspective. As all who know and love Mr. Martinez can attest to, he is a diehard Man of Steel fanatic. So when a long-delayed, long-awaited, nine-figure blockbuster movie production comes out to bring the beloved characters back to life, one might imagine he could have some difficulty viewing it objectively. Anything that does even a passable job would be amazing to him, right?
That was pretty much the way I saw it, until I re-watched the movie Serenity the other night. Most of you have seen it, but I'll summarize the details briefly. Serenity is the movie follow up to the aborted television show Firefly, created by Joss Whedon. I have been a major fan of Joss for many years now, having absolutely loved his previous shows, Angel and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. He has a unique brand of action, adventure, compelling characters, and laugh-out-loud humor that always captures my imagination. Despite this, I didn't watch Firefly when it was on the air. I caught the series on dvd when I heard they were making a movie - I wanted to see what the fuss was about. So I watched all 14 episodes. Then I watched them again. And again. By the time the movie came out, I had seen them all probably 5 times. This isn't unusual - I own or rent many series on dvd and watch them repeatedly - but this show was particularly good, especially for the incredible potential it had. I loved the characters. I loved the setting. I loved the conflicts and the themes. I simply loved it.
So the movie came out, and I went with all my friends (re: you). I was positively blown away. They were able to perfectly recreate a story I loved on the big screen, and advanced it in exciting, meaningful, and at times heart-wrenching ways. I think everyone that went enjoyed it, but having seen the series and connected with the story and characters beforehand, I enjoyed it on a much higher level than anyone who went in cold. And now, if I tell people that Serenity was one of the top three movies of all time, I'm sure to get funny looks, even from people who enjoyed it. It was relatively low-budget ($40 mil), had no big-named stars, and it borrowed a lot from Star Wars and other of its predecessors. (The Mal/Han Solo comparison is obvious.) But for me, that was a nearly flawless cinematic experience.
So now I have a greater appreciation of Superman Returns, at least for what it means to Andy. There are certain stories that speak to each of us on an entirely different level than to everyone else; others can see something for what it is, but no one can see something for what it is to me.
Were we even watching the same movie?
No. No, we really were not.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Sign Me Up
Anyone else down?
