Archive for September, 2007
sexy books »
Wednesday, September 12th, 2007
I was reading some old posts on the alternet today. The ads there are almost always politically motivated no shit right? and then I see this:
Apparently sex sells has gone from a cliché to a rule of thumb. A few questions come to mind…
Is this a lazy night in with your classy purple dress? What the hell. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate for her to be laying in three-year-old pajama bottoms with logos of Sex in the City all over them and a three-sizes-too-big college hoodie? Oh, no, you’re right, the dress makes more sense.
How the hell would a girl like this make it this far into a book like that? C’mon…
And, how does the cheapbooks.com logo rate getting all close and snuggly with this skirt? Is that meant to imply that somehow buying books there will help you sort a plush situation such as this for yourself?
It’s a lie people, there are only two points in one’s life that reading is social: when he/she is in a book club/class where discussion is welcomed, and when the relationship has grown so comfortable see: stale that scanning prose on opposite ends of a couch becomes routine.
And how about this fantastic piece of work?
Really? Way to lay on the subtle. But I believe this more than snuggling up with cheapbooks-blond up there. Overt’s a good word. Or flagrant. Or absurd. or hellahot If you don’t know Tom Ford, he’s the has-to-be-homosexual guy from Gucci. Nothing against him, but for a man like this you may have seen him on the Vanity Fair cover to use an ad like the one above is hilarious. Copyranter has more.
big ish »
Wednesday, September 12th, 2007
The lakehouse now has H.B.O. and by that I mean the seven H.B.O. channels, plus the elusive On-Demand, which is the first time I’ve been privy to the legendary commercial-less, possible-boobs greatness. So far, I’m not overly impressed. Curb your Enthusiasm is great, but I’ve already seen those. The movies will come in handy, but they’re not all sweet watched part of ’big bounce’ yesterday. I did watch Big Love for the first time yesterday though.
I think I’m underwhelmed. It’s hard to say. Maybe they’re creating an allegory for our freedoms being pressed out of us by the establishment. I doubt it. The characters are decent, but I had trouble keeping up this likely comes more from it being my first viewing than bad writing and they came off as pretty stereotypical. They even have a recovered wife working as a child’s advocate. Nice.
Here’s to hoping something fills in the gap between curb and entourage, but it’s only costing an extra $6, so it’s no hair off my head. how’s that for an inside joke to those who have actually seen me in person. ha.
caveman »
Tuesday, September 11th, 2007
I haven’t had a lot of time to read into the news (read: RSS feed articles) or keep up with current commentary (read: blogs) much lately. I don’t know why really, but it’s coming up on movie season and I’ve been going out a lot. (Well, guess I just solved that one.) But I found an article in the reader from back on August 16th. It’s interesting.
I don’t think I can follow a diet like this one, but I’ve thought of similar things before. It’s interesting to me how modern tribal instincts have adapted to the rise of civilization. We were around for a few dozen millions of years before we started planting half the seeds we were snacking on to have more snack next year. It’s only logical that the instincts and biological make-up would be slower to shift.
Men are more athletic than women because they have the capacity for more strength. They compete against one another for societal standing in order to win the favor of the most prized females to ensure the strongest offspring. Women have a higher fat content and their bodies circulate heat differently in order to bear children. Women are more apt to group-building activities. With a larger group of women there is more guidance for those offspring.
Today things are oriented more financially. Being physically fit is more about attraction than providing, but still important. Men compete more frequently in organized sports, but women develop complex social networks much faster.
Men use maps and guides and tend to have a better conceptual sense of direction. They are sometimes better at determining north, south, east, and west. Men had to travel large distances for food before farming.
Women use landmarks and experience to find their way. Women gathered closer, relatively, and their targets rarely moved. Recently, they’ve been shown to more accurately remember where certain foods were located in a grocery after visiting only once.
Over the millennia, we developed conservation systems in our bodies. There are certain points to which we gain weight and then rest at that weight for the rest of our lives. It developed to store fat reserves in time of famine. Today we have food in abundance. Walking to and from lunch, I typically see at least fifteen overweight people and at least five obese or morbidly obese people.
For millions of years we ate berries, nuts, and whatever we could kill. For a few hundred years we consumed vegetables and grains with some dairy. For the last seventy years we’ve consumed complex sugars, simple sugars, corn syrup, and liquid calories. It makes sense that our bodies can’t adjust quickly enough to avoid the decaying that comes along with such an abrupt change.
das leben der anderen »
Monday, September 10th, 2007
[the lives of others]
Masterful. Maybe that’s a slight overstatement, but this one was incredibly good. It’s a story of modest heroism in a time of societal unease. The intensity is genuine and throughout. Most deriving from an audience knowing more than the characters as their lives are being surveilled. There is a voyeuristic quality that saturates each twist.
It’s the story of an intelligence officer (Captain Wiesler) in the East German Secret Police. He is chosen as to lead in the surveillance of a playwright (Georg Dreyman) and his actress girlfriend (Christa-Maria Sieland). During the project, Wiesler starts to question his own believes and loyalties.
It’s suspense lies in the consuming oppression of the regime that these characters live under. There is a constant unease and this is brilliantly directed. One scene in particular, involving Lieutenant (I forget specifically his rank) Grubitz at the lunch table, exemplifies that oppression. Everything from where they’re sitting, the joke from the subordinate, the Lieutenant’s response, and Wiesler’s expression, paints a picture of deep unrest.
The film is drab and colorless. The characters rarely change clothes. While watching, the emotions felt are incredibly subtle, and thus more impactful. The story draws you in. The characters are dramatic and multifaceted. There is even more tension in the fact that Wiesler and Dreyman never directly interact.
There are a few knocks against it though. There are quite a few continuation tweaks. And, almost ironically, the actress chosen to play the actress (Martina Gedeck) was terrible. Her character was tormented throughout, but instead of a layered and complex character, she comes off as stale and superficial. Even in her most intense scenes, she has the cold, blank eyes of a German statue.
I don’t mind it, though, because of the other characters covering for her. Dreyman is brilliantly acted by Koch and the subtlety of Mühe in his portrayal of Wiesler is great. They both express with ease the thankless heroism that makes the story so powerful.
I’d recommend this for a night in for two reasons. First, there are subtitles. Second, it’s not the subject for light viewing. It’s an intense movie with a lot to follow, but if you’re paying attention the subtle nuances are incredibly entertaining.
*****
make a wish kids… »
Monday, September 10th, 2007
You watched it didn’t you. C’mon. Be real with me. I can admit I did. The same morbid curiosity that sparked my viewing of ghost rider and georgia rule wouldn’t allow me to miss it. And I know at least one or two of you took a peek. It’s not as though there was much else on last night about eight.
Don’t know what I’m talking about? Really? Well it’s the Britney Spears’ see: trainwreck return performance at the V.M.A.s of course. It was touted for weeks. I didn’t know she would be on until Friday though. I guess I haven’t been watching enough M.T.V. lately. I’ll get on that. If you missed the performance, check it out here. I warn you, it’s unfortunate.
I don’t know what a forty-seven-year-old stripper’s act would look like after a hip replacement and two rounds of liposuction, but I suddenly have at least a vague idea. The show was about as depressing as I could imagine and even more pathetic. With her dancers working to relatively simple choreography, she couldn’t keep up beyond subtle gestures and lopsided spinning. In fact, just pacing from left to right on stage seemed difficult enough. She couldn’t seem to find her mark see: drunk off her ass.
Her wig or extensions—in any case that mop was not even close to home grown was laughable, but not as funny as her physique. Holy hell lady. If this is what shows up after the stress and anticipation of opening something as important ha; important as the v.m.a.s, I’d hate to see her at a low-key club gig. Someone with a pretty talented hand at least put some effort into air-brushing false definition in her once stunning abs. trust me, I pay attention to such things.
She couldn’t bring herself to gyrate any more than an uncoordinated seven year old. In fact, if it weren’t for the aged stripper look she was going for, I would better associate her with some pre-teen off the street who had been shown the dance an hour before the show. She couldn’t keep up with even the basic turns in the dances and looked like she had put off rehearsal in favor of a chips-and-cheese buffet.
This is a fallen star, and it’s depressing. She could never sing and her societal antics are legendary only because we have nothing better to pay attention to; or because we’re too stupid to keep up with even mildly intellectual personalities, but at least she could dance. It’s all gone. She’s dried up like a desert stream bed about this time of year.
I would say I’m sad to see her go if it weren’t so hilarious watching her leave. Do you think she’ll be back for more? Maybe a video where she’s coyly glaring at the camera like it’s a plate of waffle fries while sprawled on a velvet couch? Or rolling over in a plush bed wearing an outfit similar to last night’s and why the ultra-snug bra? did she think her tots would fall out? she never even bent over far enough to touch her knee; I think the tots were safe, but without all those dancers showing her up? Or maybe she’ll just have a camera set on a table framing her eating cheetos and watches Oprah while her new single plays in the background. I’d watch that one.