Author: Puppy

Semper Puppy

The Obvious Ones Are So Much Easier To Write

To all the CA/A’s fervently protesting the inclusion of “God” in the pledge of allegiance: Why aren’t you also protesting the inclusion of “with Liberty and Justice for all”?

I mean, the main argument to remove “God” from the pledge is that not all students believe in God/God may not exist.

But even that argument acknowledges (barring the insane extremists) that it’s at least POSSIBLE that God exists, and that SOME students may believe in God.

Who is stupid/ignorant/insane enough to believe that ALL people in the United States receive EXACTLY THE SAME “Liberty” and “Justice”?

Therefore, it’s a false statement. One with more evidence of being false than the statement “God exists”.

Where’s the quest-for-truth-telling fervor about that?

And more importantly, why don’t you take the time you’re wasting on a “pledge” that few students (I know…I was one once) take seriously and spend it on a legitimate Secular Humanist cause?

Like…I don’t know…something involving Liberty or Justice.

And to the CA/A-lemming argument “Well, this involves Liberty”…please. Let’s be serious here. If a student doesn’t believe in God, since they’re chanting in unison, they can say “Cthulu” or “The Devil” or “Joe Schmoe” or “flabbityfloobity” under their breath and noone will notice OR give a d@mn.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Confessions Of A Mouth-Breather

After incessant droning, dull, computerized mostly CA/A propaganda, I have come to realize that I AM in fact a Mouth-Breather.

I must admit that I am also a Nose-Breather, sometimes a Mouth-And-Nose-Breather, more likely a Mouth-Breather when my nose is stuffed up, and more likely a Nose-Breather if my lips have been sewn shut by that ‘Crazies’ doctor.

In addition, I am admittedly a Finger-Toucher, a Hand-Grabber, an Ear-Listener, a Nose-Sniffer, a Lip-Kisser, a Mouth-Swallower, a Taste-Buds-Taster, a Lung-Breather, a Foot-Stepper, a Legs-Walker, a Middle-Finger-To-Obnoxious-CA/A’s-erector, a Naughty-Bits-Waste-Matter-Excretor, and of course a Mind-Thinker.

So if any pseudo-intellectual CA/A (or other random lunatic) labels you a “Mouth-Breather”, be thankful, and simply refer to my handy guide on CA/A’s.

Thank you.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Upstream Color (2013)

From Shane Carruth, the man who surprised the hell out of me with ‘Primer’.

VERY weird, very odd, very artsy, very well-made.

I have little idea what most of this means. It strikes me, from a purely logical and analytical standpoint, as something completely meaningless. It strikes me, in that sense, as something so incredibly pretentious it would make the worst artsy-horrid French filmmaker blush.

But I FEEL that there’s something here…it does not feel, as logically I know it should (in my mind), to be nonsense. It feels as though this is deep and important and possibly even profound.

What is the case? I don’t know, really. Perhaps the filmmaker, as he did in ‘Primer’, simply knows how to evoke feelings of meaning whether or not they exist. Perhaps his meaningless quirks happen to speak to my particular sensibilities for some reason I don’t understand.

Very perplexing, much like ‘Primer’. But unlike that movie, I don’t know WHY this is perplexing. For to be perplexed, one must care. And I do not know why I care.

In any case, this is beyond me: if it’s worthless nonsense then I was interested in worthless nonsense for the duration and inspired enough to write this long and felt a review.

If it’s more, I can’t say what.

It’s enough to make me actually question my subconscious mind – to wonder why I felt this way. Because I don’t know.

Either way, it’s something I’m glad I watched. But I can’t say why I’m glad nor can I explain the movie, really, in any worthwhile fashion to a non-viewer.

It’s like…listening to Brian Eno if I liked Brian Eno, or going on a trip without taking drugs. Unexplainable to one who does not experience, and that’s the way it should be. Maybe?

Tranquil.

It’s like…having a dream – that you don’t understand while it’s happening, and you don’t understand from what you recall imperfectly upon awakening. But nevertheless, it does make you refreshed and full of a mild wonder. Eventually it will fade, and then it will be impossible to recall why it had meaning at all. Because you never really knew, you just felt.

The writer and director also wrote the score, so the “experience” is solely his. I wish I could peek inside his mind to know what this is, if only to know whether it’s an F- or an A+. Because I can’t tell.

Inspirational Review: “While Upstream Color has a fair amount of (purely functional) dialogue, it’s essentially a silent film, obsessed not just with color but with texture and movement and rhythm.” – Mike D’Angelo

Grade: B-

7/14/18: The Great Grade Update. Grade: B

Dead Snow 2: Red Vs. Dead (2014)

One of the most tasteless movies, beginning to end, that I have ever seen.

Gory, bloody, Americanized sequel that has two things the original didn’t: A bit of wit and some fairly consistent camp.

Of course it also has long periods of useless gore filler and useless non-gore filler, but it’s an improvement.

Inspirational Quote: “It’s not what it looks like!”

Grade: D

Abraham Lincoln Vs. Zombies (2012)

Incredibly bad zombie flick not to be confused with ‘Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter’, which is probably just as stupid.

My insistence on watching and reviewing anything zombie-related is both a burden and a comfort: I tried two sh1t movies before this (the terrible ‘Nightbreed’ and the polished-to-a-boring-sheen ‘Odd Thomas’) and stopped partway through each after realizing they weren’t worth the time. I knew that right away with this, but didn’t have to worry cuz I was locked in.

Abe’s weapon is TOTALLY bada$$, but even the camp value wears thin about halfway through. And without camp value it’s an F-.

Fav character: random bird walking on camera behind a tense scene.

Inspirational Quote: “Emancipate THIS!”

Grade: D-

Allan Muir: How One Sentence Can Wreck An Article

So I’m reading an article about the Bruins by a writer named Allan Muir, and he’s making a lot of decent points: they’re getting old (some of them), their defense needs to be better on both ends, they need more scoring, etc…

And then, either because he’s trying very hard to make a point in order to “sell” his article, or because he actually believes it, he writes this:

“The Bruins’ forwards are also short of spark; only rookie David Pastrnak seems capable of generating anything creative.”

I mean, that’s just absurd. To say they need MORE offense is one thing, to say he’s the ONLY FORWARD on the team capable of offensive creativity is ridiculous. From both a having-watched them standpoint (since I have) and from a statistical standpoint. Vis:

Patrice Bergeron: 52 GP, 35 Points
Loui Eriksson: 52 GP, 31 Points
David Krejci: 33 GP, 25 Points
Brad Marchand: 48 GP, 27 Points
Carl Soderberg: 53 GP, 33 Points

David Pastrnak: 17 GP, 7 Points

Message to Allan: While it may be good copy and good fodder for readers, bringing in obviously (IMPO) faulty “points” does not make an article better…it makes it worse.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Europa Report (2013)

Boring, nondescript space exploration movie padded with lots of commentary and repetition.

Six astronauts go to one of Jupiter’s moons and discover a small sample of life and some flickering and glowing lights. At the very end they discover something else; but it seems thrown in to give the movie a point, or an ending. And it’s nothing exciting.

The acting is ok but there’s nothing here. Not in character development, character interaction, emotional resonance…anything beyond mere competence.

The Wikipedia summary of the events of the movie is more exciting than the movie itself.

Grade: D-

The Fifth Element (1997)

This is a huge, meandering “epic” sci-fi failure salvaged only slightly by impressive/very ODD visuals and parts of Milla Jovovich’s character.

As you watch an array of ‘Hunger Games’-ish silly costumes parade by, the dislocated and disjointed bits of weirdness just keep on coming…the movie doesn’t.

The plot tries to be intricate but it’s just padded. The idea is a very simple one, blown out in bad ST:TOS fashion in ways that simply aren’t necessary and are often boring and/or annoying.

Luc Besson seems to be using some recycled ‘Professional’ material here: the sounds and light-of-salvation from the cabbie’s decision scene are right out of the hotel door-opening rescue.

I find Oldman’s appearance good only because it distracts from his out-RAY!-geous southern accent.

Milla Jovovich does fairly well as a combination of naive fish-out-of-water, ultrabad supreme-type being, and spouter of really fast gibberish. Her occasional cute comments, moments of shamelessness, and speedy nonsense are the movie’s highlights. If that’s not enough for you, skip it. Oh, and there’s lots of cleavage.

Exception: The anti-war message – featuring a convincing if brief performance by Jovovich – near the end is well done, and pretty powerful. Really, it’s the first GENUINELY “realistic” emotional moment in the entire film.

But it’s not enough, and there are none to follow.

Grade: D

Deep Puppy Thoughts (Part 83)

If “Life is too short for/to X”,

How long would life have to be for X to be acceptable?

And exactly how would living to 1000 make surrounding yourself with negative people ok?

And why am I pointing out something that’s just a flippin’ figure of speech that I understand perfectly well?

Because I’m uninspired, that’s why. D@MN!

Deflategate – After Further Review

This whole thing’s just really fcken annoying, and it’s taking the FUN out of a GAME. That’s the part everyone can agree on that likes football, unless you’re a rabid Pats-hater.

The “they would’ve won anyway” argument misses the point.

The “everyone’s doing it” argument misses the point.

If it’s proven they cheated, punish them like you would any other team and move on.

After listening to some scientists talk about the issue, it seems that there is a possibility it was a natural occurence due to weather conditions.

It’s long and way too fcken complicated, but I don’t know whether they cheated or not at this point. Chalk my previous post up to not conceiving all the possibilities, not being very good at science, and not believing Bill Belichick is a paragon of virtue.

That’s it!

Oh, and in any case…Go Pats!

-Puppy >.< Yip!

From A Patriots Fan And Non-CompleteMoron

From a man who’s spent almost his entire LIFE involved in football and who prides himself on his vast knowledge of the game, the following statement – to me – strikes me about as legitimate as A-Rod claiming he was just making a normal running motion or Sal Alosi claiming he was just stretching that knee out:

“I would say I’ve learned a lot more about this process in the last three days than I knew or have talked about it in the last 40 years that I’ve coached in this league,” Belichick said. “I had no knowledge of the various steps involved in the game balls and process that went through.”

I mean, COME ON. I’m a Pats fan, but it’s getting pretty FCKEN annoying to have to deal with this sh1t from a coach who DOESN’T EVEN NEED TO RESORT TO IT. Allegedly. I’m not saying anything, but it seems pretty fcken 6.9 to me.

I think the following video clip should be played for BB every time he enters a football stadium, on the big screen (SATIRE…SATIRE…SATIRE):

10/16/16: FAIR USE: CRITICISM – A good clip from a good movie. And it fits, yet. Signature removed, oh no. (housekeeping)

Trading Places (1983)

Don’t think anyone really needs a summary. But I was watching it again (mostly to review it), so here’s a little blurb:

A man is transformed into a GENTLEMAN! Needless to say, it disgraces him for life…he can’t even look his CHILDREN in the face!

It’s held up pretty well. Interesting Three Stooges premise – though not as good as the Stooges episode – and decent writing and acting.

The only problem is that the vast majority of the last quarter is stupid, boring, and/or cliche. The Stooges sometimes had similar issues.

Grade: C

7/14/18: The Great Grade Update. Grade: C+

Suspended Animation (2001)

Nice animated intro: I’ll take his rejects.

If you’re expecting a movie about two sisters holding a man captive, that’s just a setup…most of the movie is the aftermath.

And while the setup is convincing and freaky, the aftermath is NOT “horror”…it’s dark drama, and not nearly as convincing.

And THEN it turns again, into a mediocre thriller.

And WHAT a brave and smart leading man! Everyone knows the best way to overcome trauma is to drag your supportive, loving wife into it while also neglecting her and her feelings!

Movie one of three was a fairly interesting short.

Grade: D-

Elfie Hopkins: Cannibal Hunter (2013)

Strikes me sort of like a British version of ‘The Burbs’…AT FIRST.

Elfie and friend are not-very-good-or-necessary “investigators” until a somewhat odd new family moves into town.

Basically it’s a “dark”-ish comedy in the lightest possible sense…up to a point.

Unfortunately, after a while of fairly decent buildup along those lines it finishes as a generic horror flick with a rather weak ending.

Disappointing, really…I was hoping for better.

To those perfectionists (not me. well, sometimes.) and Britons (sp?, Alba Gu Brath!) who criticize my usage of the US name and release date, this quote from Cliff in the spirit of fun:

“So if you Brits ever find yourselves in trouble against, uh, another major military power like Argentina, don’t worry about a thing. We Yanks will be there to bail you out just like we worked on the last two big ones, eh?”

Grade: D

7/14/18: The Great Grade Update. Grade: D+

Total Recall (1990)

I watched this to get over ‘Omnivores’…and to have a “January 2015” archive.

It was a light-hearted welcome to mock some of the really cheezy and Immortal-Arnold moments.

Basically this is just a mediocre if occasionally fun and somewhat visually impressive sci/fi-action cr@p vehicle for Schwarzenegger.

For a GOOD Philip K. Dick adaptation, try ‘Minority Report’.

Inspirational Quote: “I’ll blow this place up and be home in time for cornflakes.”

Grade: D+

Why ALL Bullying Is Bad – A Crash Course For The CI

NOTE: This is not an “anti-intellectual” post.

Intellectual is great.

Smug, arrogant, rude intellectual is NOT.

A lot of today’s crusading intellectuals seem to me – in an Einstein-ian “rebel against religious indoctrination” sense – to be compensating for the fact that they were picked on and made fun of in the not-too-distant past for being geeky, dorky, nerdy, and/or smart.

In the not-too-distant past when they were kids, that is, and being geeky/dorky/nerdy/smart was NOT considered “cool”.

Now, was it ABSURD and HORRIBLE that people were made fun of for these reasons?

YES. No qualifications. YES. I WAS ONE OF THEM.

Does it therefore make it justifiable for the people who still harbor resentment over these childhood slights to act EXACTLY THE SAME WAY towards people they consider stupid?

NO. No qualifications. NO. I’m NOT one of them, TG/TloG.

When I make fun of someone for being stupid, it’s because they’re an a$$hole – who also happens to be stupid. But “a$$hole” is the key to the equation, not “stupid”.

Some people are less smart than others.

Doesn’t make them “less” of a person any more than being less: attractive, “cool”, popular, fashionable, successful, rich, famous…

I mean, it’s sad really: I see groups of “intellectuals” gather together at the metaphorical school lunch table and trade smart comments and make fun of all the not-as-cool “dumb” people…

And it’s DEJA VU…of the groups of jocks and preps gathered together at the school lunch table (really) trading sports and fashion comments and making fun of all the not-as-cool “geeky/dorky/nerdy/smart” people.

Everyone is ignorant of something. A true intellectual seeks to teach those that wish to learn, not mock those that haven’t yet.

The Crusading Intellectual – as the CA/A – seeks not to educate for the sake of educating. They seek to insult and degrade, for the purpose of inflating their own feelings of self-worth.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Knights Of Badassdom (2013)

About a group of really-into-it LARPers (is there any other kind?).

Well the trick is either a) getting LARPers who can ACT – on film – or b) getting actors good enough to convince people they like LARPing when they don’t.

As a D+D fan I find it mildly interesting when it’s a mixture of playful/serious gaming, IC/OOC commenting, playful self-mockery, etc. This is done fairly well.

However, when it tries to become a “horror” movie, the lack of a budget makes it completely unscary and makes the rest not nearly as fun.

And this is about half an hour in.

It then gets progressively worse and worse until it is absolutely TERRIBLE.

D+D fans might like the first 30 mins or so.

Inspirational Quote: “We’ll be back you redneck c@cksuckers…this I vow.”

Grade: D-

Snowpiercer (2013)

Sucked in by the description? Me too.

The “main” story is supposedly about mankind’s effort to stop global warming by releasing a large amount of some chemical into the atmosphere – a plan that apparently backfires in a Twilight Zone “hot/cold” episode sort of a way.

But the real story is about a train containing the last remnants of humanity, where class and treatment are organized by proximity to the front (engine) of the train.

Apparently the train has been running for almost 20 years and the “upper”, “middle”, and “lower” classes have been more and more clearly defined, with the lower of course existing only to serve the upper. There’s also a sort of Godhood that has developed concerning the supposed leader, “Wilford”, and his sacred engine.

It’s got some really weird/freaky/stupid images and lines.

It’s also got some really weird/freaky/impressive images. Not many lines though.

The idea itself is enough to get through the low parts. I thought at one point it was going to grind to a halt (metaphorically speaking) but it actually got better as it went along, at least to a point.

More inspired than ‘The Hunger Games’, that’s for sure.

Grade: C+

So What?

I like to think I have something that most CA/A’s lack: a sense of humor.

So what’s the big deal with NdT’s tweets?

He spent maybe a grand total of 15 minutes of his life conceiving, composing, and posting them.

Get over it, people…at least he doesn’t spend his LIFE ranting on and on about something he considers so trivial – which is what separates him from CA/A’s.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

OK, OK…Just ONE More…

I KNOW, I KNOW…but they’re such EASY targets.

The most fervent/insane Crusading Atheists/Antitheists (in their various splinter groups, as they refuse to be defined; much like the group in the video below) love to say that religion “has never done any good” and “is responsible for all the world’s problems”.

These statements are both false and COMPLETELY illogical.

Statistically speaking, to suggest NO good has EVER come from religion is a VIRTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY, even by PURE CHANCE.

Statistically speaking, to suggest ALL problems have as their SOLE CAUSE “religion” is a VIRTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY as well.

Therefore, the most fervent of the “pro-logic” CA/A’s are, by definition, ILLOGICAL. It’s a simple formula, really. Even *I* understand it!

10/16/16: FAIR USE: CRITICISM – Good clip from a decent, overrated movie. (housekeeping)

No Offense, But…

“Is it my misperception, or are 99% of those arguing for the absolute right of Americans to see #TheInterview rich white straight males?”

Just a factual analysis of the four demographics mentioned in this statement, taking it purely at face value:

Rich: Incorrect and extremely inaccurate. If, by rich, you mean rich for a U.S. citizen; which I assume you mean when you say “Americans”. I don’t think the VAST majority of the people complaining are rich. I think the vast majority are low-to-middle-income…you know, the TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC of the movie.

White: Much more accurate, certainly, since there are lots of white people in the U.S…and since it features white people as the “stars”, probably the target demographic. So…”99 percent”? I don’t think so. Incorrect, but not nearly as inaccurate as “rich”.

Straight: ABSOLUTELY no idea. I wasn’t aware that sexual preference had anything to do with liking or not liking mediocre lowbrow slapstick satires where lots of sh1t blows up. I wasn’t aware of it probably because there is little relation, and CERTAINLY not enough of a relation to make it “99 percent” a “straight” movie. This is more mind-boggling that it’s even mentioned than anything else.

Males: Again, as with “white”, much more accurate than “rich” or “straight”. Because, AGAIN, the target demographic for mediocre lowbrow slapstick satires with lots of sh1t blowing up IS male. I’ve heard it called Three Stooges-ish, and if that’s correct, then CERTAINLY male is the demographic from my experience. And I LOVE the Stooges. But they were funny, this probably not nearly as much. But even here, “99 percent” is incorrect, if LESS inaccurate than “rich” or “straight”.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

When It’s Good To Be In The One Percent – Satire By Puppy (Part Three)

1) Agreed.
2) Agreed.
3) Interesting…
4) I’d refer you to Tim Meadows’ “Whitey” bit, but I don’t know where it is.

And to end, yet another time reminded of this:

“Is it not possible that an objective approach that frowns upon personal connections between the entities examined will harm people, turn them into miserable, unfriendly, self-righteous mechanisms without charm and humour?”

-Puppy >.< Yip!

When It’s Good To Be In The One Percent – Satire By Puppy (Part Two)

Well…there are only a few things I can think of that he could possibly be trying to say…

1) I’m very bad at statistics.
2) I want to say something to ingratiate myself to my followers.
3) Propaganda is a horrible thing, unless it’s mine.
OR
4) I fully believe that virtually all people who make any comment at all supporting this probably-cr@ppy movie are not doing so for any legitimate reason whatsoever: 99 percent of them are just rich, ruling-class oppressors who don’t care about anything that doesn’t affect rich straight white males and are just venting about something to make themselves feel better about how horrible they are in their ruling-class oppressiveness.

Next, the final chapter: Answers!

When It’s Good To Be In The One Percent – Satire By Puppy

Preface: This is satire mocking a statement I consider absurd.

Ok, so I haven’t had much material to work with lately, but this is pretty decent…so let’s give it a whirl:

“Is it my misperception, or are 99% of those arguing for the absolute right of Americans to see #TheInterview rich white straight males?” – A tweeter who wants DESPERATELY to be relevant.

First, let me translate this post for people not as pseudo-intellectual as he is.

Second, I will analyze possible meanings.

Third, I shall respond.

Ok, here’s the translation into (IMPO, 6.9 on it) what he actually MEANT:

“I’m going to phrase this in the form of a semi-rhetorical question as opposed to an angry/angsty statement because I think I’m clever, and also so I can give the appearance of having a sense of humor and a willingness to listen to opposing viewpoints. In reality, I have none, and I have none…I exist to spout my propaganda AKA Paul Pierce (that’s a little in-joke for my sports fan readers!), and all who disagree are inherently wrong, since my propaganda is the BEST propaganda!”

Whew…that’s the first four words…moving on…

“I’ve done no actual research into the statistics of this, but based solely on a quick scan of posts I’m going to make a summary judgement invoking stats I pulled out of my rather tight a$$”

Ummm…that’s the 99% part…so, FIVE words this time. So I guess what he’s saying here is that he’s part of the 1 percent. OH! Sorry, just a little propagandic nonsense in line with my subject. Anyhoo…

“Making any sort of comment whatsoever supporting freedom of expression and against allowing another country to control what we see/watch/listen to; be it strong, light, joking, satirical…any comment at all…”

Notice the use of EXTREME words for propagandic purposes. It’s a little trick propagandists have: if you use a STRONGER word, your argument seems stronger. So in this case any snide off-hand remark about the subject falls into “arguing for the absolute right”. See how that works?

“Of people living in the United States to see #TheInterview”

He seems to forget that there are other people called “Americans” that do not live in the United States. But hey, he’s just your typical white male, it’s to be expected…dunno about the rich or straight parts, but who cares?

“Greedy capitalist pig non-minority oppressors of minorities?”

“rich white straight males?” denotes a complete lack of minority status: the oppressors of minorities, therefore, because one thing intrinsically means the other.

Phew…next, part two: possible (complete) meanings.

Now THIS Is What Upset Them So Much

Warning: Clicking on this link may make you subject to North Korean hacking.

It’s also pretty graphic.

But hey, here goes!

http://www.aol.com/article/2014/12/18/watch-the-scene-where-kim-jong-un-is-killed-in-the-interview/21118614/

And, in related news of similar seriousness and importance:

10/16/16: FAIR USE: CRITICISM – I like this clip. Oh boy. (housekeeping)