Posts Tagged 'charlie sheen'


I’m tired of coming up with semi-clever titles for my Sunday posts, so from now on anytime I do an entry on Sunday that covers a wide range of subjects, it’ll just be put in the new Sunday, Sunday Sunday series. If you don’t get the triple Sunday reference, this kind of ad should refresh your memory:


Here are the random things that I dwelled on this week:

-So another Middle Eastern country (Libya) is in a state of unrest, and of course the oil companies (or whoever the fuck is responsible) has used it as an excuse to once again ass rape us at the pumps. I could do a 1,000-word, expletive filled rant on the price of oil, but I’ll spare you, and I’ll spare myself the brain hemorrhage that would result from thinking about it for too long. Suffice to say, when it comes to the news or politics or however you want to categorize it, the asinine reasons the price of oil goes up and down is #1 on the list of things that can piss me off the fastest. Some motherfucker sneezes in the Iranian desert, and somehow that means I should pay more for gas in South Carolina. Go figure.

But that’s not what I’m getting at this time. I saw THIS article linked on Drudge on Thursday and could do nothing but shake my head and clench my fists. The headline reads, “Obama Says Pentagon exploring Libya options.” My initial reaction was, “Why?” Why are we exploring ANY military options with regards to civil unrest in Libya? Why should one American life be put in harm’s way to stop Libyans from harming each other? Hello? Bueller? I simply do not understand this thinking. We have no money to spare at home, but to help mediate and ease tensions abroad, we’ll not only put our manpower in harm’s way, but we’ll continue paying for it all with our Monopoly money, because if it’s military spending, there is apparently no limit to what we should be willing to borrow.

What good can come from trying to solve Libya’s problems? The world will be thankful? Bullshit. The majority of the world holds a negative opinion of us, most of the time for doing exactly this kind of thing. Why can’t we mind our own fucking business? Why are all of the world’s woes OUR duty to resolve? If the countries in the surrounding area don’t care enough to do anything about it when it may affect THEM, why should we? These are very simple questions, but our leaders refuse to answer them. We should initiate airstrikes on Gaddafi‘s forces? WHY? Then we’re responsible for cleaning up the mess. We should give weapons to the rebels? Look how well THAT idea has turned out in the past. Just stay. The fuck. Out of it. We owe nothing to the Libyan people. NOTHING. You guys gonna give us exclusive rights to your oil, and at a discount? No? Then what else do you have to offer us? What else makes this worth our time?

If the only reason anyone can come up with for us to spend one penny or one minute of our time over there is “those people need our help”, then I’m sorry, that’s not enough. Ya know who needs our help? The people of Detroit. The Border Patrol needs our help. We need to help ourselves in countless ways before we help anyone else on this ungrateful, godforsaken planet. How about trying this, people of Libya…if starting a revolution is worth it, take the risk and HELP YOURSELVES. The United States of America is not the custodian of the globe.

I also love the part in the piece where it essentially says, “China and Russia ain’t doin shit.” See, THIS is the problem, people. The evil nations of the world, who are power hungry, corrupt, and envious of America’s “superpower” status (whatever that means), sit by and wait, while we continually waste money and spread our resources across the world to intervene in matters that have nothing to do with U.S. interests. Why can’t China fix Libya’s mess? And the best part for these scumbag countries? The world doesn’t come down harshly on them, because doing nothing is expected of them.

The sad part is, I believe President Obama doesn’t actually want to intervene over there (at least not in any major capacity), but this is how powerful the military lobby is inside the government. For Obama, his opposition may exist for nothing other than political reasons, because the more the rest of the world requires his attention, the less time he gets to spend trying to accomplish anything at home, something which would surely be used against him by his opponents next year. He needs to remember something; his title is President of the United States, not Police Commissioner of the World.

And to those conservatives who say we should do something because, “America needs to set a moral example for the world”, I have two responses; 1) What good has that done us so far?, and 2) We can’t even set a good moral example amongst ourselves, so first things first.

By the way, in the same article, it mentions that Libya produces 1.8% of the world’s oil supply. ONE POINT EIGHT MOTHERFUCKING PERCENT, and because production has slowed there, I’ve had my gas prices go up more than 30 cents in a week?!?!


I fucking digress…

-I sort of referenced this in a Facebook post, but I wanted to elaborate. I’m wondering when this huge reversal happened in Hollywood. It used to be you had a talent, became an entertainer, and you became famous through the entertainment you provided. Now, because of stupidass reality TV (and sex tapes of all things), people like Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian become famous, and THEN try to become entertainers, too. Paris Hilton stupidly tried her hand at both music and acting, and Kardashian used her sex tape fame to do a reality TV show (which I gleefully have never seen) and now is apparently attempting music. The result is this:

Like I said on Facebook, that is quite literally one of the worst (maybe THE worst) pieces of “music” I’ve ever heard. It’s so bad that I demand to know who is responsible. Did someone in the music industry actually think she might be able to sing? If so, WHO? Did she insist on giving it a shot because she’s so famous now and felt she could branch out? And what producer, once this became a reality, actually said, “Yes, I’ll be the one to try and make this happen!” On a disaster of this scale, we need to find those who are responsible, and if possible, bring them to justice. I wouldn’t equate this to, say, the federal government’s response time to Hurricane Katrina, but don’t you have to put it CLOSE?

All things being equal, I still find Kim Kardashian mildly attractive. But let’s be honest, she’s not famous because of who her father was, or because she grew up already having a talent. No, she became famous because of video that showed up online of her having sex. After that, she started showing up on every Hollywood gossip website because the paparazzi took pictures of her at every party or nightclub or Hollywood event she ever attended. People saw that pictures of her were popular, so someone (AHEM, Ryan Seacrest, ahem) thought it should be taken to the next level, gave her and her family a reality show, and all of this climaxed with reports last month that the Kardashians supposedly made $65 million in 2010. THIS is what being a random attractive girl with some connections in Hollywood can lead to if you’re willing to have sex on camera and then have it “leak” onto the internet. Welcome to America…I guess? In a way I almost respect it. They have shown just what can be accomplished simply by being famous. The American public has shown that having a talent, or ANY value to society whatsoever, is not a requirement if you’re seeking to become a household name. One has to wonder what the deceased Robert Kardashian (a successful lawyer best known for being on the O.J. Simpson defense team) is thinking of all of this. Is he proud, or has be been spinning in his grave so hard and so fast that his body melted when it drilled its way to the earth’s core? I think the latter is a distinct possibility.

EDITOR’S NOTE: If Snooki ever releases an album, I’ll know it’s time to put a gun in my mouth.

EDITOR’S NOTE 2: Let it be known that I don’t mind admitting I find Kim Kardashian attractive, but I never asked to hear her singing voice, nor do I care to know if she can act. Really, I’d prefer if she was seen and never heard.

Now, if you didn’t know who she was, and
I asked you, “Porn star or mainstream
celebrity?” you’d at least have to pause,

For more on the subject of the rise of talentless celebrities, I refer you to the Wikipedia page famous for being famous, which also lists other notable useless celebs.

-My evisceration of last week’s Oscar show got me to thinking of who I would want to see host the Oscars in the future. Because when I complain about something, I try to also offer solutions.

One thing that’s hard to figure is exactly what audience the Academy wants to reach. Do they even know? Everybody wants to go “young”, but what does that really mean? They want 18-22 year olds to watch? The only people that watch the show consistently at that age are nerds like me. That’s not the audience they should be after. I would argue that the show doesn’t have to be “young & hip.” It simply has to be good. And by its very nature, awards shows like this are more appropriate for adults. The host and presenters should be funny, with a little bit of edge to them, and they need be willing to try new things to make the show interesting. But really, when you think about what “young & hip” is in 2011, it’s nothing that intelligent Academy members (or intelligent people who watch the show) should be aspiring to. I never hear any so-called media critic saying any of this. They all just want to call the Oscars “long and boring.” It’s a fucking awards show, not a Broadway musical, not a Jay-Z concert.

Anyway, I pondered it, and based on what I think the Oscars should be trying to do, here are 11 people I wouldn’t mind seeing as host for the first time, and a few previous hosts I’d like back for another go.

Will Smith (It’s funny that in all these years I don’t think he’s ever done any big hosting gig. But if you want a ratings spike, hiring the biggest movie star you’ve got certainly couldn’t hurt. I’m not sure how good he’d be at the monologues, but he could do any kind of skit or stage performance.)

Robert Downey Jr. (Like I said previously, he’s great every time he presents, so it’s time to hand him the keys. He’s also the second or third biggest star we have right now, and I think people would want to see him try it.)

Tom Hanks (He’s almost always a presenter, so I think it’s time for Mr. Charming to take the next step.)

Kevin Spacey (It just seems like he’d be very good. He can be funny and witty, and he understands stage presence.)

Matt Damon (I’m not 100% certain he’d be good, but he can be damn funny when he wants to be. I’m just not sure how good he’d be live in front of a huge crowd. But he’s almost universally liked and respected, and I think audiences would tune in.)

Jane Lynch (Come on, this would HAVE to be good, wouldn’t it?)

Conan O’Brien (How has this not happened already? I’m pretty sure he’s been asked a bunch of times but just hasn’t been willing for whatever reason.)

Jerry Seinfeld (Maybe just because I miss his standup comedy. I don’t know if it’d work, but I’d love to see him try it.)

Justin Timberlake (He’s the guy a lot of media people point to as a logical choice, and I’d certainly be interested in seeing him try it. His SNL hosting was excellent, but can he hold and sway the huge crowd inside the Kodak Theatre?)

Bill Maher (If you wanted to go the edgy route, I think he’s a good option. Yes, there’d be a lot of left wing political references that would drive me nuts, but he’s fearless, and most importantly, he’s funny!)

Russell Brand or Ricky Gervais (I think you’d get a similar type of show from both, and it would sure as hell be funny. I might ask Gervais to tone down the meanness a bit, but I think he’d be awesome.)

and, of course…

Billy Crystal (Yeah, he’s the safe, classical choice, but damn he knows what he’s doing.)

-I also wouldn’t complain if Steve Martin and/or Alec Baldwin were asked to do it again. Or Maybe Baldwin & Tina Fey together.


Chad Johnson wouldn’t mind playing for the Jets and Jets players would love to have him. Let them have each other. [PFT]

-I find it entirely appropriate that the new Mike Tyson reality show is airing on Animal Planet.

-This is excellent. Fake ads for items representing movie clichés. [Cracked]

-I’ve had a genius idea. I’m coming up with a dream cast for a remake of The Room. It’s not done yet, but when it is, I’ll share it here. Let’s just say this, is there anyone else who could play Johnny in a Room remake better than Nicolas Cage? No, there isn’t. Feel free to share any of your casting ideas with me.

I must see The Room live.

-How cool is this?

-This one’s for Gnarly Gnarlingtons only:

Recommended Listening: “Shelter”, by The XX

Have a super duper week.

2011 Oscar reactions (and more!)

Welcome to my post-mortem to the 83rd Annual Academy Awards. I say post-mortem because a lot of what happened on that show has left me dead inside. So let’s get straight into it. I was very disappointed in this year’s Oscar ceremony. It was very bland, poorly produced, poorly written, and poorly executed. There were hardly any surprises (with regards to the show or the winners), and for once I can’t fault the people who say they were bored to tears by it. It won’t change my enthusiasm for watching the Oscars going forward, but I’d be lying if I said I was in any way impressed by this year’s show.

I think in recent years the Oscars have suffered greatly because of all the televised awards shows that now precede it. I know the Academy wants to be last because they’re the most important movie awards ceremony, but with the acting categories in particular, we’re now seeing the same 4 people (Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor, Supporting Actress) win award after award after award on TV, and by the time they finally win their Oscars, there’s no suspense whatsoever. You can even tell most of the time with the audience inside the theater. Now, when an actor wins, the only people who are genuinely excited for him or her are the cast & crew who also worked on that actor’s movie. There are hardly ever any standing ovations (even for genius, once-in-a-lifetime performances like Daniel Day-Lewis in There Will Be Blood) because these same people have been applauding the same winners for over a month at various other awards ceremonies, and they seem completely indifferent by the time the Oscars roll around. And so too, it seems, is the audience at home.

I don’t have a clear cut solution to this conundrum, but I’d give them a lot of credit if they had the balls to leapfrog the Golden Globes, SAG, DGA, PGA and WGA awards and do the Oscars in mid-January instead of late February/early March. I don’t even know if that’s a good idea, but it’s one way that the winners would be fresh, and it’s a way the Oscars could set the standard as opposed to being reactionary. You don’t have to be the last one out of the gate to have the most prestige. Anyway, nobody can accuse me of not having an idea, dammit. Either way, this is a problem the Oscars need to address soon if they want to be less stale.

Having said all that, let me be clear in that I agree with all 4 of this year’s acting winners. I think the right people won in all 4 categories, and that’s a rare feat for the Oscars. I’m just saying that audiences are tired of seeing the same people win at every show, and that has nothing at all to do with the legitimacy of their victories. I believe in merit and that the best should always win, but that doesn’t change the fact that many people in the general public (and some voters) prefer to see surprises just for the sake of seeing a surprise. I guess the argument there would be that surprises make for better television, and better TV is more important than meritocracy to some (not me).

Deserving winners all.

Probably the biggest reason I love watching the Oscars is the mood it puts me in. I usually come away from the show happy and feeling inspired, with a fresh desire to get back to work on the script that will bust down the door for me and officially begin the career I want so very much. I got very little of that inspiration or joy this year. Sure, Christian Bale and Natalie Portman gave classy speeches (as did Original Screenplay winner David Seidler), but there was nothing all that memorable in the nearly 3 and a half hours of the show. I like to think I’m honest with myself, and if I’m being honest and I were grading the 83rd Academy Awards, I can give it nothing better than a D. Typically, I get annoyed by all the critics and media people and bloggers who spend the days after the Oscars making wisecracks and bitching about various aspects of the show, but this time, I can’t really blame them. The stuff they always bitch about actually were problems this year, and I’m sad to have to admit that.

A few specific notes and reactions:

James Franco & Anne Hathaway as hosts. Yikes. Turns out this was not a very bright idea. First off, the two had no chemistry together on stage. I’m not even sure Franco even looked at her, which was very strange. If the only reason these two were chosen to host was to somehow attract a younger audience, that was an epic failure. The rest of the show skewed just as ‘old’ as ever. You actually have to give your host(s) interesting, funny things to do. They aren’t there just to introduce presenters. Seriously, other than coming out for 30 seconds dressed as a woman, what did James Franco do other than simple introductions that could have just as easily been done by the P.A. announcer? I mean, besides the opening sequence of the show with the prerecorded Inception spoof, I could have done everything Franco did on that show. That’s not a good sign. He may just be too laid back for this kind of thing. I almost feel like I could see him regretting the decision to do it (though if you were online, it was funny that he was tweeting backstage pictures and video throughout the show). Listen, the dude is a multitalented, wonderful actor and seems like a cool guy, but like many other great creative talents, he doesn’t appear comfortable in that kind of public setting. Hathaway (who I also love as a performer) did a nice job during her little singing segment, but for the majority of the show, she was simply standing next to Franco and giggling at everything he said. And when she wasn’t doing that, she was screaming approval at the presenters like a high school cheerleader. The charisma was, shall we say…lacking.

It was telling when Billy Crystal came out for a cameo appearance and immediately got a standing ovation. It was as if the crowd were begging him to take over hosting duties right then and there, like a middle relief pitcher who has to come into the game in the 4th inning because the starter just got lit up for 7 runs. That couldn’t have been encouraging for Franco & Hathaway. Crystal is a true showman, and his work on the Oscar stage is completely effortless. I know it was their first time hosting, but both the newbies seemed horribly out of place.

“Now hosting…number 42. Mariano Rivera Billy Crystal.”

By the way, every time Robert Downey Jr. appears at the show, he kills it. There’s a guy who should get a chance at hosting, if the Academy is serious about trying someone new.

-The Kirk Douglas fiasco. What is there to say? That was one of the most awkward things I’ve ever seen. A lot of people are trying to cover for him by saying, “Oh, it was great to see him doing well!” Umm, does that really qualify as “doing well?” Does the simple fact that he’s alive mean he’s doing well? I think the bar should be set a little higher than that, and it’s safe to say no 94-year old should be out on that stage alone for that long. Where was someone from his family or someone at the Academy begging and pleading that this was a terrible idea? I mean, he literally hijacked the show (probably without even realizing it). You couldn’t understand most of what he was saying, there were long, drawn out moments where he didn’t say anything; it was just horrifying to watch. So much so that I literally turned away and covered my ears a couple times. On the plus side (I guess), he’s given the late night talk show hosts enough material for 6 months worth of monologue jokes.

“This is MY show now!”

-What was David Fincher‘s problem? He seemed completely miserable and ambivalent to the whole thing. Even when several of his crew won Oscars and graciously thanked him during their speeches, I don’t think he cracked a smile once. Show some pride in your crew, man. If I’m ever lucky enough to be in his position, I’ll be standing and applauding whenever one of my crew won an award. Look at how proud James Cameron was last year of all his guys winning for Avatar. I respected the hell out of that. I love Fincher as much as the next fanboy, but if he was that upset at being there, he shouldn’t have showed up. He pulled a Jay Cutler, sitting emotionless and nonchalant on the sideline like he wasn’t even part of the proceedings. Very disappointing.

-I’m glad they told the audience not to clap for individual people during the In Memoriam clip. It’s always awkward when certain dead people get roaring ovations, and then the next person gets total silence or merely a polite golf clap just because they weren’t a popular, big name actor.

-Then there was the part where Anne Hathaway introduced Hilary Swank, who then immediately introduced Kathryn Bigelow to present Best Director. HUH?! Much as I love Hilary Swank, we probably could have cut out the middle woman on that one, no? There’s 30 seconds of airtime trimmed.

-As much as I worship Steven Spielberg, how many times is he gonna present Best Picture? It seems like he’s done it 5 of the last 10 years. There are no other distinguished veteran actors or filmmakers who are willing to do this? I could list 10 people who’d be suited for it. And no, Kirk Douglas is not one of them.

Quick notes on some of the winners and losers:

Randy Newman won for a good, but ultimately unmemorable Toy Story 3 song. I think he won because people thought (rightly so) that the other 3 options were similarly unremarkable (though “If I Rise” from 127 Hours is a superior song to Newman’s). If you look at my nominees, the Newman song is probably the weakest of the bunch, and I have 5 nominees, not 4. The Academy voters have NO vision when it comes to choosing original songs. I mean, these boobs didn’t even NOMINATE Bruce Springsteen‘s “The Wrestler” 2 years ago, and that song should have been the hands down winner. They didn’t even nominate it. Lunacy.

Alice in Wonderland winning for Art Direction and Costume Design. Holy shit. I’ve seen some travesties in my years of watching the Oscars, but this is especially appalling. It’s not quite “Shakespeare in Love beat Saving Private Ryan for Best Picture” bad, but it’s in the top 10. All these talented artists designing and building amazing sets in real life for movies like True Grit, Inception, King’s Speech and Harry Potter, and they give Art Direction to a movie where all the art direction was done on a fuckin computer. That’s insulting. This would be like giving Best Picture to a video game. I don’t know how they screwed that up, I really don’t. And then they give it Costume Design, when really there were only about 5 humans in the movie to begin with. Or did the plurality of Oscar voters really think the digital costumes on the stupid CGI rabbit and the stupid frog butlers in the castle were that brilliant? Give me a break. Alice in Wonderland is basically an animated film. You don’t give animated movies awards for art direction and costumes, unless you want to create categories specifically for that. Best Animated Art Direction to Alice in Wonderland? Fine, have at it. But so long as people are building real sets in the real world, they ought to get first priority in winning awards like this. Obviously!

-As happy as I was for Inception‘s Wally Pfister winning for Cinematography, this really should have been Roger Deakins‘ year. This is now 9 Oscar nominations for Deakins with no wins, and when he finally does work that clearly stood above the rest, he still doesn’t win. I don’t get it.

-Though Inception didn’t get all the nominations it deserved, it was still able to tie The King’s Speech with 4 wins (Cinematography, Sound, Sound Editing, Visual Effects), which is very cool. Someone even called Christopher Nolan his “master”, which I found amusing.

-And since I guess you can’t discuss the Oscars without talking about who wore what, I’ll do my part. I’m no fashion expert, but I know what I like. And I’ve pretty much loved everything Jennifer Lawrence has worn this entire awards season. She did not disappoint in her grand finale:

Kudos also to red carpet hotties Mila Kunis, Scarlett Johansson and Erin Andrews (though who knows why she was there).

Oh fine, one more:

In the name of the father, the son, the holy spirit…

-Finally, I’d like to thank Charlie Sheen for not only being a drunkard drug fiend, but for now being clinically insane on top of it all. Thanks to that epic 20-minute rant he did on that radio show last week, we now have this amazing Charlie Sheen Soundboard to play with (be sure to click on the arrows as there are 4 pages to it). Winning!

The Biggie award winners will be announced tomorrow. I have to get the stench of some of these Oscar results off my hands.

Today’s Recommended Listening? A very nice dance mix I recently heard to Radiohead‘s masterpiece, “Everything In Its Right Place”, done by the great Paul Oakenfold.


Top Rated