So this 16-year-old decides to steal a car. While being chased by the police, he decides the thing to do is to bail out of the passenger side… while the car is still going at a pretty good rate of speed, with the result that he’s spun like a ragdoll. At the time he was wearing a neck brace due to an injury he’d received from a prior car theft escapade. He has apparently *several* recent arrests related to car theft.
So, the question: what good could come from this fine young gentleman ever being released back into society? Can any valid argument be made for something other than permanent incarceration, deportation or execution? Is there any possibility that someone with this combination of criminality *and* mind-boggling stupidity ever contributing positively to society? Or would the community and the gene pool be best served by him being removed from it before he could do more damage?
In the process of bailing out he let his car continue down the road unmanned. Passing over the median and crashing head-on into another vehicle, potentially killing people, is a very real prospect. Consequently, IMO he should be charged with attempted murder. And since I see no reason to be lenient with *incompetent* murderers compared to successful ones, I see no reason why he should avoid the maximum punishment meted out to murderers.
The question has been asked a bajillion times since about five minutes after “The Lord of the Rings” was published: why didn’t Gandalf simply call in the eagles to fly the One Ring to Mount Doom? Would have saved a *lot* of time and trouble. Fans have dreamed up many theories about why the eagles weren’t called in, but the video below purports to be audio of J.R.R. Tolkien explaining exactly why he did not have that solution in his book. His explanation is *really* good, the best explanation possible:
What kind of father wants his son to reject masculinity? A bad one. But at least in this case this weak man bends to his childs wishes and lets his son actually be a boy. This kid has an uphill battle to reach manhood with a father who is as strong as a damp Kleenex. The kid will very likely begin to assert his own power at some point, and if his parents aren’t able to impart the manly virtue of self control, we might wind up with yet another anti-social monster.
Ghostbusters 2016 is a terrible film. Part of that is of course the toxic nature of the people responsible for it, but the film itself is crap regardless of the culture-eroding behavior of those responsible. If the universe was a good and just place, GB16 would be utterly forgotten by now… but here we are, in a world filled with famine and disease and earthquakes and Bernie Bros, so GB16 remains a blight on the ass of society. Fortunately, when it is discussed these days, it is largely discussed in terms of just how awful it is and what makes it awful. The following two-part video does a good job of breaking down the terrible decisions that led to that cinematic trainwreck. It is vastly more entertaining than the movie itself.
An eight-year-old poured gasoline onto a tennis ball, lit it on fire and threw it at the face of a six-year-old. The story is of course lean on details, but if you listen to the report, the neighbors sound like real pieces of work. The bully had apparently previously put the victim in the hospital with a physical assault resulting in a concussion, and numbers of kids reported seen playing with gasoline and setting stuff on fire.
I don’t imagine this story will get a whole lot of press. The curious thing is that if instead of the victim being a 6-year-old kid, it was a *cat,* there’d likely be more outrage; I know I’d certain be more vociferous. And it’s not because cats are necessarily more valuable than kids (though I’d argue that the worst, angriest, feralest alleycat is worth any number of the bullies in this story), but we as a species and a culture have become rather numb to terrible things being done to children, even *by* other children. Coupled with the fact that cats, dogs, possums, raccoons, whatever, are pretty much by definition “innocent” and incapable of evil… while this story demonstrates that children are perfectly capable of evil and demonstrating the validity, nay, the necessity of some sort of eugenics program.
I don’t know why YouTube decided I needed to see this, but I both rue and lament it. It is a debate (???) amongst a group of shrieking harpies young women about… well, I don’t really know. Something about how men are terrible, or something. One thing I caught was the claim that men are more emotional than women… which if that’s true for the men in *these* women’s lives… wow. Wow.
These are people who seem to get along and presumably have similar outlooks/beliefs. The way they seem wholly incapable of having a thought and not expressing it immediately at high volume would seem to explain why so many college-age people these days cannot witness someone speak political heresy without losing their minds and screaming like dollar store banshees on meth.
I can only imagine what would have happened if some guy had been invited into the room, calmly sat down and, when asked, told them “you’re wrong.”
I have hopes that at least some of these – Star Wars and Star Trek – can be returned from the dead. But to do so would require both a virtually complete change in “leadership” (i.e. those who are currently in charge of the IP’s) and an adequate passage of time. They should be left to sit quietly for a few years, in which time the hatred that recent misadventures have engendered in the fandom could cool off, and better ideas could be gathered.
I remain of the opinion that what the owners of Star Trek need to do are two main things:
1) Gather all the rights back into one place, allowing *real,* and not “25% different,” Star Trek to be made.
2) Create an anthology series. But *not* one helmed by a bunch of suits. Instead, open it to the fandom. Have anything from lone writers to whole amateur production teams (“Axanar,” “Continues,” etc) give them pitches. Those that seem pretty good get funded to make a small number of episodes… one to four, say. Something that could be a series. Then make a season with up to perhaps ten wildly different stories. One set on a ship at the same time as TOS, using actual TOS designs. One set in the movie era. A Klingon or Vulcan-specific yarn. A post-Voyager show. What-the-frell-ever. If, out of those ten shows, one is a smash hit? It gets turned into a full series. If three or four of the stories are wildly popular? Then great, now you can have four series that are popular right out of the gate.
Sure, there are counter-arguments. One big one is that ten wildly different stories would require ten wildly different sets of costumes and props and actors and starship bridge sets. Granted. But: do them sequentially and repurpose as much as possible. Do as much as you reasonably can with virtual sets. Don’t go nuts with the budget; let it be known right up front that the budget for these sort of things is limited. The fandom will accept that, and perhaps embrace it: I will die on the hill that TOS 1701 is the best starship design to date, and that both DS9 and Enterprise showed that the old-school bridge – which can be rented in New York State, IIRC – still looks awesome. You don’t need STD-level production standards for these little mini-shows. Because what you’re selling isn’t the effects; nobody complains that STD or STP have crappy effects and production standards – you’re selling the concept, the characters, the plots. If just one of these lower-budget short subjects knocks the viewers socks off with characters on par with Kirk and Spock and McCoy, *then* you can lavish an effects budget on it reasonably secure in the knowledge that things should go well.
Hell, I even wrote a short story a year or so ago set on a Klingon tugboat. Is it good? Dunno. Probably not. But if those in charge of Star trek seemed like they actually cared about Star Trek again… hell yeah I’d turn it in. There’s even my odd little “Artifact L-374-Alpha” thing from… holy crap, exactly one year ago today. Weird. OK… Anyway, that would likely make a poor basis for an ongoing series, but a season-long miniseries? Maybe.
Is such a thing likely? Sadly, no. So we’ll have to live with murdered franchises for a while, being dangled before us on strings like marionette zombies.
This is a strange movie. It’s strange on purpose, though. It is not a fantasy movie like “Conan the Barbarian,” which it has been compared to; but it has a lot of fantastical elements based on Norse spiritualism. Characters get whacked out on shrooms and have visions; Valkyrie show up to carry people to Valhalla; an invasion of a burial mound involves a fight against a draugr; magical seeresses show up and dispense wisdom; dead folk give advice; magical swords. But the way it’s filmed, it can be argued that none of these magical elements are *real,* but instead are the results of imagination and hallucinations.
What’s not hallucination is the rather visceral violence shown. “The Northman” is a violent flick to be sure; lots and lots of people have horrible things happen to them. And most of the people who get hacked and stabbed aren’t villains or warriors, but just regular schmoes who live in a world red in tooth and claw. And that’s not too unrealistic: up until on the order of a century ago most people on this planet could expect to encounter – and perhaps be done in by – violence. The “hero” of the movie is not a saint; he partakes in raids on settlements meant for nothing more noble that stealing people for slaves… and killing their children. He’s not a “good guy,” merely the protagonist. There’s a lot of “Yikes” here.
That said: the movie is in its way damned awesome. The cinematography, the scenery, the badassery and the WFTery are all entertaining as Hel.
It seems unlikely that it’s going to be a blockbuster; it may well not even be a financial success. It cost around $90 million to make, but it has so far made around $12 million (domestically) on the opening weekend. When I saw it on opening day, there were a grand total of three of us in the theater.
Now, one way to determine the value of something is to see who its enemies are. And lo and behold, “The Northman” has people who are opposed to it, as exemplified by this article:
The problem the author has with the movie is that this movie appeals to “the far right.” That it has Nordic symbols, that the men are masculine, the women feminine, and, perhaps worst of all, a movie set in 9th century Norway, Russia and Iceland features exclusively Scandinavian and Slavic people. Where are the Africans and Indians and Chinese and Mexicans? Not to be seen here… because they didn’t actually exist in 9th century Norway, Russia and Iceland. The author then goes on to say that “The Lord of the Rings” and “Braveheart” are tainted by white supremacy by not having The Narrative-approved stunt casting. The funniest thing of all is that the author despairs that *any* movies might appeal to “the far right,” while apparently either ignoring or perhaps approving of the vast pile of movies and TV shows that are made specifically to appeal to “the far left.” In fact:
By this stage, in fact, film-makers ought to have realised that if the far right doesn’t hate your film, you might be doing something wrong.
A similar hate-piece with a truly entertaining headline:
White supremacists have claimed ownership over the new Viking Hollywood blockbuster The Northman, which stars Nicole Kidman and Anya Taylor-Joy.
Ummm… yeah, those two are in it, but neither is the star of the movie. The star of the movie is a *man.* You know… the Northman. This article goes on and on, including tweets from random nobodies, to claim that this movie somehow advocates for Nazism and white supremacy… based on nothing other than the fact it has a bunch of white people in it.
A movie that is historically accurate, or accurate to the lore or authorial intent of the original subject, is “catnip” for the far right. This makes it clear that to appeal to the left, a movie should lie, to twist, to distort, to fill itself with leftist propaganda subtle or gross. Perhaps the author should consider that he’s the baddie.
Go see “The Northman” and simultaneously enjoy a few hours and irritate some leftie-loons.
