Out on Limbs

US Postal Service Obsolete - Faces Extinction & Bankruptcy

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 03:38:00 +0000

I just saw a commercial for the United States Postal Service trying to convince people to stop using technology and go back to their way of doing things. In what's being called "the refrigerator commercial", they say the following – "a refrigerator has never been hacked" (I beg to differ), "an online virus has never attacked a corkboard", and that there's extra security with snail mail. It won't get lost in thin air or disappear with a click. They then, naturally, tell you that if you want to know more about "safe ways to stay connected" with them, visit their website at www.usps.com/mail for God's sake.

See, stuff like this bothers me. It's a necessity to promote your business and I understand the idea behind it, but just because I understand the "why" doesn't mean I support the "what" or think the "how" was done properly. All commercials are annoying because of how much they have to lie to give off the impression that their product or service is better than what it actually is. If they told you the truth, you wouldn't be interested. The cheeseburger at Wendy's doesn't look nearly as good in real life as it does on a television ad where they brushed it with oil, stacked up the ingredients, filmed it with the proper lighting, etc. In this case, how many mail carriers do you see walking around with bright smiles on their faces, greeting people like they're Jimmy Stewart after his epiphany in It's A Wonderful Life? The people take their mail and then fart out some rainbows themselves. It's so awesome to wait 10 days for something that could have been sent directly to my computer instantaneously! Whether rain or sleet or snow – or in this case, the sunniest day in the most perfect neighborhood in Fantasyville. In reality, we have situations like if you park your car just a little bit too close to your own mailbox, you get a note on it from the mailman telling you you're a dick. We get the stereotype of the disgruntled mailman that dogs hate "going postal" and shooting up his office. [Before everyone complains to me and says I'm saying everyone that works at the USPS is a horrible human being or inept or anything, I'm not saying that. There, saved you some effort and now you don't need to comment about how much you hate me because your cousin once delivered mail.]

Whether rain or sprinklers, we'll be there.

Just like nearly everything else nowadays, they focus on the scare tactics rather than presenting facts to you, because if you look into the pros and cons, your product pretty much sucks in comparison. Let's tell the people that if they use an alternative, bad things will happen, so ignore the benefits. What are those benefits? Well for one, as I mentioned above, there's the time frame. They don't call this form "snail mail" because it's a cute little slug with a backpack handing you your birthday card – they do it because it takes longer than anything else. When you send someone an email and it doesn't go through, you usually get a message right afterward that says it didn't send. You then can easily just resend it. What happens when you send mail through the US Postal Service and it gets lost? You might not EVER find out that it didn't get sent. How about the time it takes to get a paycheck, drive it to the bank, deposit it, drive home, write a check out, and then have it delivered in the mail versus automatic deposit and bill payment through the computer? No contest. You want to talk about computer viruses and hacking, what about mail fraud? When have you seen it cost more money to email someone as opposed to how they keep raising the price of stamps? All I get with my normal mail anymore is junk ads that I throw out like credit card companies begging me for their service, hoping I'm irrational with my spending so I can owe them my life with interest or the occasional pamphlet about how there's yet another pizza place that opened up in the area. The last thing I received through a non-electronic method? I can't remember the last package that was sent to me through something other than FedEx or UPS.

New slogan for Pizza Hut: "We Deliver Pizza To You". No shit you do.

You want to save the US Postal Service? Here's what you do. First off, stop raising your prices. Everyone seems to think that if you're hurting for money, up your cost and it'll make up for it. Instead, people just say "bullshit, I'm not spending even more" and they stop using you entirely. Ask nearly every business that has tried this how it worked out. Also, you're hurting from email? Put some effort into trying to create the best mail service possible through the internet. How did the USPS never fully get invested in the "electronic mail" concept? Losing money because FedEx and UPS are stealing customers away? Look into charging less for your shipping so people use you as an alternative. If you offer a better deal for the same or better service, people will use you. What's this I'm hearing about how you might stop delivering mail on more than Sundays now? You win by offering more for less, not less for more. I'm not spending more money on your company for you to give me less – ask Comcast, who tries to up my bill every year and remove channels.

I don't WANT the United States Postal Service to go under and die out, but the way they're refusing to adapt and survive, it looks like that just might happen.

Get with the times, adapt. It worked for the toothbrush.

2012 Oscars / 84th Academy Awards Results & Predictions of Winners

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 18:00:00 +0000

Every year, I like to do my best to predict the winners of the Academy Awards. The following are the nominees, my predictions, and eventually the results as well as my review on the results.

NOTE: Normally I make some blind predictions, then watch all of the movies, then make a more informed decision. This year, however, I just can't find myself able to do it. Why? Because the films listed below are SO pretentious and I find them just completely uninteresting to watch to a ridiculous level. Thus, my predictions will remain virtually as a shot in the dark from what I know about the movies that I haven't seen and in comparison to the few I have.

BEST PICTURE
NOMINEES: The Artist, The Descendants, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, The Help, Hugo, Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, The Tree of Life, War Horse

BLIND PREDICTION: The Artist - considering how douchey this year is, this is the douchiest.

RESULT: The Artist

BEST ACTOR
NOMINEES: Demian Bichir (A Better Life), George Clooney (The Descendants), Jean Dujardin (The Artist), Gary Oldman (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy), Brad Pitt (Moneyball)

BLIND PREDICTION: George Clooney. I did enjoy his performance.

RESULT: Jean Dujardin

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
NOMINEES: Kenneth Branagh (My Week with Marilyn), Jonah Hill (Moneyball), Nick Nolte (Warrior), Christopher Plummer (Beginners), Max von Sydow (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close)

BLIND PREDICTION: Christopher Plummer. Why? I don't know. He won the Golden Globe, that's about it.

RESULT: Christopher Plummer

BEST ACTRESS
NOMINEES: Glenn Close (Albert Nobbs), Viola Davis (The Help), Rooney Mara (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo), Meryl Streep (The Iron Lady), Michelle Williams (My Week with Marilyn)

BLIND PREDICTION: Michelle Williams - people are obsessed with Monroe for some reason.

RESULT: Meryl Streep

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
NOMINEES: Berenice Bejo (The Artist), Jessica Chastain (The Help), Melissa McCarthy (Bridesmaids), Janet McTeer (Albert Nobbs), Octavia Spencer (The Help)

BLIND PREDICTION: Octavia Spencer - biggest buzz.

RESULT: Octavia Spencer

BEST ANIMATED FILM
NOMINEES: A Cat in Paris, Chico and Rita, Kung Fu Panda 2, Puss in Boots, Rango

BLIND PREDICTION: Rango.

RESULT: Rango

BEST ART DIRECTION
NOMINEES: The Artist, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, Hugo, Midnight in Paris, War Horse

BLIND PREDICTION: This is a toss-up as they never follow a format here. I'll say Hugo, but no matter what, I'm sure I'll be wrong and they'll pick the Artist, or if I pick the Artist, they'll pick Hugo. I'll go with Hugo, though.

RESULT: Hugo

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
NOMINEES: The Artist, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Hugo, The Tree of Life, War Horse

BLIND PREDICTION: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo - just to give it something.

RESULT: Hugo

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
NOMINEES: Anonymous, The Artist, Hugo, Jane Eyre, W.E

BLIND PREDICTION: The Artist - typically, one film wins a lot of these things and the Artist is nominated for a lot.

RESULT: The Artist

BEST DIRECTOR
NOMINEES: Woody Allen (Midnight in Paris), Michel Hazanavicius (The Artist), Terrence Malick (The Tree of Life), Alexander Payne (The Descendants), Martin Scorsese (Hugo)

BLIND PREDICTION: Martin Scorsese - I can see this being the reason why Hugo is nominated for so much but wouldn't win Best Picture.

RESULT: Michel Hazanavicius (The Artist)

BEST DOCUMENTARY
NOMINEES: Hell and Back Again, If a Tree Falls: A Short Story of the Earth Liberation Front, Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory, Pina, Undefeated

BLIND PREDICTION: I don't make predictions on this category because I never watch them.

RESULT: Undefeated

BEST DOCUMENTARY (SHORT)
NOMINEES: The Barber of Birmingham: Foot Soldier of the Civil Rights Movement, God is the Bigger Elvis, Incident in New Baghdad, Saving Face, The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom

BLIND PREDICTION: I don't make predictions on this category because I never watch them.

RESULT: Saving Face

BEST FILM EDITING
NOMINEES: The Artist, The Descendants, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Hugo, Moneyball

BLIND PREDICTION: The Artist.

RESULT: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
NOMINEES: Bullhead, Footnote, In Darkness, Monsieur Lazhar, A Separation

BLIND PREDICTION: I have to go with A Separation. Normally I don't predict this category, but if they gave this a nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay as well, I'd be foolish not to pick it as their future choice.

RESULT: A Separation

BEST MAKEUP
NOMINEES: Albert Nobbs, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, The Iron Lady

BLIND PREDICTION: Albert Nobbs - no reason.

RESULT: The Iron Lady

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
NOMINEES: The Adventures of Tintin (John Williams), The Artist (Ludovic Bource), Hugo (Howard Shore), Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Alberto Iglesias), War Horse (John Williams)

BLIND PREDICTION: The Adventures of Tintin - no real reason.

RESULT: The Artist

BEST ORIGINAL SONG
NOMINEES: "Man or Muppet" by Bret McKenzie (The Muppets) or "Real in Rio" by Sergio Mendes, Carlinhos Brown, and Siedah Garrett (Rio)

BLIND PREDICTION: Extremely surprised that there's only two nominations this year. That seems crazy. Let's go with the Muppets on this one...what the hell, right?

RESULT: "Man or Muppet" from The Muppets

BEST ANIMATED SHORT
NOMINEES: Dimanche, The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore, La Luna, A Morning Stroll, Wild Life

BLIND PREDICTION: I don't make predictions on this category because I never watch them.

RESULT: The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore

BEST SHORT FILM
NOMINEES: Pentecost, Raju, The Shore, Time Freak, Tuba Atlantic

BLIND PREDICTION: I don't make predictions on this category because I never watch them.

RESULT: The Shore

BEST SOUND EDITING
NOMINEES: Drive, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Hugo, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, War Horse

BLIND PREDICTION: Hugo.

RESULT: Hugo

BEST SOUND MIXING
NOMINEES: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Hugo, Moneyball, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, War Horse

BLIND PREDICTION: Hugo.

RESULT: Hugo

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
NOMINEES: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, Hugo, Real Steel, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Transformers: Dark of the Moon

BLIND PREDICTION: Rise of the Planet of the Apes - to help appease the Andy Serkis debate.

RESULT: Hugo

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
NOMINEES: The Artist, Bridesmaids, Margin Call, Midnight in Paris, A Separation

BLIND PREDICTION: The Artist.

RESULT: Midnight in Paris

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
NOMINEES: The Descendants, Hugo, The Ides of March, Moneyball, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

BLIND PREDICTION: Moneyball - though I'm about 90% sure they'll just give it to Descendants or something instead now that I've predicted it to be Moneyball.

RESULT: The Descendants

THOUGHTS: I was unable to watch nearly every movie nominated because I just couldn't get interested in them. This year was a boring show to me itself due to that factor, as it's hard to get invested in an award show if you don't care about any films nominated for any category. I'm very surprised a lot of things weren't nominated for a lot of categories. The highlight of the show in my mind was Emma Stone's presentation. My predictions score was 10 wrong, 10 right. For a blind guess, I guess you can't expect much better than a 50/50 split considering how it wasn't a 50/50 guess between 5 nominees - but I guarantee I would have done better if I had been interested in the films and watched them.

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?

Respecting Someone's Beliefs & That's Your Opinion

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 13:00:00 +0000

Oftentimes, I find myself in arguments where people use the typical phrase of "that's your opinion" - even if sometimes, I'm stating a fact and they're too stupid to realize it - as if that suddenly means there's no room for discussion and an opinion can't be right or wrong. This ties into another phrase, "I respect your beliefs".

The problem I have with these two sayings is that they're meant to be an 'out' for an argument but they rarely are used in the proper context. Something people tend not to understand is that there's a difference between respecting someone's right to believe in something you disagree with and respecting someone's beliefs themselves. I wholeheartedly respect the notion that someone can disagree with me and form a belief that I don't condone or subscribe to. They're entitled to do that, considering how I'm not infallible or all-knowing (yet). However, that does not mean I have to respect whatever their point of view is and put ANY kind of credibility into it whatsoever.

Not all beliefs that contradict each other are of equal value. Some things that are believed out there by people are just flat out wrong and absolutely stupid, completely out of the realm of plausibility. Sure, you can disagree with me saying that I think The Shawshank Redemption and The Godfather are the two best films of all time. Fine, I can live with that, and we can agree to disagree. What I can't be fine with, however, is if you tell me you think Jimmy Stewart played Michael Corleone. You are wrong. He didn't. End of story. I don't need to "respect your opinion", you're a fucking moron.

"Well, that's your opinion" you might be thinking. Yes, it is, and any educated person would agree with me. An opinion is not a legitimate fact in black and white so generally speaking, it's up in the air whether or not an opinion can be right or wrong. Back in the past, if your opinion was that the world was flat, it turns out you were wrong, but if your opinion is that I Can't Believe It's Not Butter tastes the same as regular butter, power to you. If we're talking facts, you can't throw this "that's your opinion" line at me to try to end the discussion - nor can you tell me I have to respect you blindly and not explain why you're so dumb.

Respect is thrown around way too much nowadays as some word that has been bastardized into meaning "you shouldn't disagree with me and you should always support what I want" and it's incredibly abused by hypocrites, primarily. Ever heard someone in an argument say to the other person "I respect you, but..." and follow that up with an insult? Pointless for you to say the respect thing first because it clearly isn't true. Here's a scenario that we've all experienced in the past: an old person does something wrong, you call them out on it, they say you're not respecting your elders. This isn't an issue of respect, this is an issue of right and wrong. They have no legs to stand on about doing something negative so they try to hide behind this protective shield. Just because you're old doesn't grant you immunity from responsibility and fault.

Many people reading this right now might get the wrong impression, that I'm saying there's no inherent respect. Not true. Respect needs to be earned through character and actions, not age or wealth or anything other than behavior. HOWEVER - and here's the most important concept in this whole article - every stranger needs to be treated with the baseline respect of "you're potentially a decent average human being that deserves not to be treated worse than average until you prove me otherwise". Some people are better than average. Lots of people are much, much worse. You adjust the respect accordingly.

And if you disagree with me on this, I respect your entitlement to disagree with me - but HOW you disagree with me might both be disrespectful and absurd, and yes, that would be my opinion ;)

The Major Flaw of Christmas Movies

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 14:00:00 +0000

Christmas movies are a staple of the film industry. Every year, we see a few new ones try desperately to shove themselves into the pop culture consciousness, with only the rare examples actually becoming noteworthy enough for people to remember. Despite a bad track record, the thing that bothers me the most about Christmas movies isn't that they're just generally piss poor to watch, but that they all have one big glaring problem nobody seems to ever acknowledge...

SANTA.

Wait a second, Tony, how can Santa be the problem of a genre of film dedicated to the fictional character? That would be like saying the reason Ghost Rider sucked wasn't because of it's bad script or the cheesy jokes or the bad acting or the lackluster action or the (ok you get the point, Ghost Rider sucked), but because the Ghost Rider character was in it. Not exactly. The problem comes in when you look not at the essence of Santa Claus but the purpose of Santa Claus.

Backstory for those that may not know it: Santa Claus flies around the world in one night's time, sneaks into your house, gives you gifts if you've been good and coal if you've been bad, and that's about it, we don't need to get bogged down in the details. The character is of course a whimsical fantasy that only kids and severely damaged adults believe in, and this transitions to the films as well. Frequently, a Christmas movie will tackle the subject that adults need to be more childlike and stop working at their office job because their ties are strangling them and what we really need in the world is the innocence of youth and to cherish family (and blah blah blah), and it'll do this through a war of beliefs in Santa Claus. Someone doesn't believe, others try to convince them, we find out that Santa was real all along (despite how, you know, he isn't).

The problem comes into play when you look at the time frame before the film starts. Let's say our protagonist is Phil and he doesn't believe in Santa but his stepson (or his biological son that he shares custody with, there's usually some divorce angle thrown in there) does and he's trying to convince him that he's real. The kid's got all the excuses in the world - he's a kid. Kids are dumb. You could tell a young enough kid that if lemonade is made from lemons, orangeade from oranges, and limeade from limes, that Gatorade is made from squeezing the juice out of alligators, and they'll probably believe you. The kid doesn't know that Phil's been buying the gifts all the time.

But what about Phil? What the fuck does Phil think when his kid suddenly has gifts all these years that he never bought and never placed under the tree? Did Phil, every single year, just think to himself that he must have completely forgotten buying all those toys, wrapping them, putting them out there when he was decorating, and so forth? What about every other person in the world? All of those people have been getting gifts from Santa for years and it isn't common knowledge that Santa exists? EVERYBODY either thinks they've got amnesia and they never bring it up to anybody else they know, or they do and Phil has just been utterly oblivious to this fact of life for a few decades? That's beyond living under a rock.

The only way that this proof of Santa's existence doesn't become common knowledge is if there are no gifts every year that confuse the parents. If the parents never see any gifts that they didn't buy, then of course they would think Santa doesn't exist - because Santa never gives people any gifts to show any bit of existence. That's even more clear cut than the God/miracle thing as those are open to interpretation but you damn well know whether or not you had an extra physical item you unwrapped. Thus, if Santa isn't giving out any of these gifts, to anybody, ever...well, Santa's kind of a pointless douche, now isn't he? That would by default mean either everyone in the world was naughty and Santa figured "fuck it, no coal, that's too much work for negative reinforcement" or Santa just decided to be lazy and ignore all the good people.

Which one is it - do all of the parents in the entire world always neglect and turn a blind eye to these magical gifts that continually show up every year in Santa Claus fashion that they then deny fitting the Santa Claus description, or is Santa not doing his job and therefore, these kids shouldn't be so excited about him existing in the first place because he's a dick?

See...this is why I watch Home Alone every year instead.

Not pictured: Tim Allen

10 Types of People I Hate Bumping Into in Public

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 14:15:00 +0000

The holidays are upon us and that means a lot of us will be spending much more time out in stores. While thinking about this, I was thinking about all the types of people that are going to be increasingly difficult to avoid within the next few months...

1. The Talkative Co-Shopper

You're going through the aisles at a store, looking for the items on your list, and this person is next to you. Etiquette should be as simple as not smacking your carts into each other, but this person feels they need to go the extra mile. Apparently, we're buddies simply because we both want cereal. You're getting some Corn Pops too?! Hello new best friend! Look at us, we're two peas - we both wear shirts, we both shop at a place that sells shirts, and we're both doing it right now! We certainly have a lot in common! This person just strikes up a conversation right in the middle of it, as if we've been chit-chatting for the whole afternoon. It's never anything interesting, either. It's always some stupid line about how they've been looking for something that they couldn't find until right now (problem solved, why are you telling me?) or how their kid or husband or friend loves [insert product here]. Extra points are awarded to the old people that feel the need to inform you about their medical problems just because you're buying some cough drops. I'm someone that doesn't mind striking up a conversation with a stranger - but only in certain circumstances. If we're both in line to see the same movie, I might strike up a conversation with you asking what your expectations are for it. If you see me buy something that you're inquisitive about (such as "have you ever tried that before, is it good?"), then by all means, ask away. But just because we're both in the chips aisle and standing next to each other doesn't mean I came over to be your friend...I came over because I want some Cheetos.

2. The Oblivious Mom

I get it, your kids are a pain in the ass and if there wasn't a stigma attached to it, you'd probably dump them in a heartbeat. They're still your responsibility and no one else's. These mothers walk aimlessly around while their attention-starved delinquents run, stomp, make noise, and start screwing things up for the rest of us. Still, the mother doesn't budge. It's as if she doesn't even notice her kids are doing this. Sometimes, that's because she actually doesn't - it's become commonplace and it no longer registers in her mind as something but the norm. Sometimes, she just doesn't give a shit and it's easier to let the kids busy themselves and annoy you than for the kids to annoy Mom. It's a bit similar to when a fat person reaches that tipping point where they stop kidding themselves and they just start buying big, stretchy clothing. Sure, you're taking up more space, making it more likely you'll ruin any furniture you sit on (and trust me, you'll be sitting a lot), and you're an eyesore, but meh, you're more comfortable just accepting your burdens. These mothers have hit the point where they feel they're no longer responsible for parenting their kids. Instead, they're just chaperones to hellions that have to stick around them and all they need to do is make sure they don't get killed. Basically, they're like those levels in video games where you have to protect some pathetic AI character from being shot.

3. The Overly Pushy Helper

I appreciate you asking if I need help, even though I know the chances that you legitimately care if I need help or not is really slim. More than likely, your boss has just told you that you need to ask every customer you see if they need help, but that's moot. Either way, once I tell you that I'm fine on my own, you should take the hint and leave. Don't start riddling me with questions about why I need what I'm buying or if I know what I'm purchasing. If I required some assistance, I wouldn't have kindly told you to buzz off, right? If I do need some help later on, I know where to find you - or any of your other coworkers. In the mean time, I'd like you to stop following me around and let me shop in peace. For a commission job, it goes with the territory as you know these guys clearly just want to hang around you and get your sale - which is understandable and has to be done - but nothing is more bothersome than someone who is up your ass the whole time you're trying to make a decision. Sometimes, I'd rather walk around and think in my own head instead of having you spit a bunch of numbers out at me that mean nothing. It irks me to know that you're just looking at me as a big paycheck. I'm more likely to want to give that sale to someone who wasn't trying to pressure me into buying something simply because they had the decency to follow my suggestion of not needing any help instead of trying to convince me that I was too dumb to do it on my own and MUST be in need of some assistance.

4. The Casual Acquaintance

Yes, I know you, and we may talk at a party for a few minutes here or there, but I'm not that interested in catching up while I'm in the middle of doing something. I came here for a purpose and it wasn't to scout for old classmates to reminisce with. Sure, it's nice to see you (probably), but if we're dedicated to figuring out what we're both up to these days, let's get together and have lunch or something instead and show some real intention and motivation. Everything is awkward about this situation. How long do you spend talking without being rude? What do you talk about? Do you have to bother saying that you'll get together sometime knowing full well that it sure as hell won't happen? Do you acknowledge that if both of you really gave a shit about each other, you would see each other often enough to not have to do this in the first place? Chances are, you're just going to tell me what school you're going to and what job you're working at, and I highly doubt that I care about that small talk. This situation is even worse if you don't exactly remember who the person is, but they clearly remember you. Now, you have to somehow get out of the conversation while dancing around specifics (including their name, hence the "hey man, what's up pal, see you later guy" wording) and do it all in a way that doesn't seem rude. Way too much work in comparison to just ignoring that I saw you.

5. The Advertiser

I don't want your flyer - if you give it to me, I'm just going to end up throwing it away. I don't want to take a survey - I have shit to do. Please don't try to guilt trip me into paying donations to something that I have never heard of before - particularly if your organization skims money off the top (and believe me, if I had the money, I'd be donating to charities, my issue isn't with the idea of charity itself). No, I don't want your fucking overpriced candy and cookies - I'm in the process of going to the store to buy some much cheaper versions of your same product which taste exactly the same, if not better, and come more to a pack. I'm not interested in watching a presentation about your new product that I'm not here to buy. Mall kiosks are horrible for this sort of thing, especially if they're trying to shill some sort of hand lotion or perfume or something. I'm a guy - you're not going to convince me to buy some fingernail exfoliating thing. I bite my nails, I don't put nail polish on them, and no matter how desperate you seem to be to convince me that it'll do wonders that you're literally pleading with me to listen, I still won't care. Go target the people that might actually listen, not the 20-something straight guy.

6. Pretty Much Anybody in Line

If you're in front of me and taking too long, that's annoying. If you're behind me and bitching about how the people in front of us are taking too long, that's annoying. Hell, if you're ringing me up and you're going through the mandatory crap you're required to say (like asking me to sign up for a credit card I don't need), that's annoying. I don't even want to be in this line to give you my money in the first place, but I need to own this stuff and you won't let me leave without paying.

7. The Dawdler

This is more so people I'm with as opposed to people I bump into. If I'm going to a store, I'm going with intent to buy something in particular - not just to shop around for the experience of shopping. I don't find it fun to try on clothes that I'm not going to buy or look at electronics that I don't have the money for. Some people find this activity enthralling and want to just spend as much time out window shopping and looking at useless crap they have no plan on purchasing for as long as possible. I, on the other hand, would much rather someone else deliver it to me for free and not have to waste my time once I know what I want. Figure out what you need, go to the store that sells it, go to that department, grab the item, go to the line, pay for it, leave. The end. I don't want to look in aisles that don't apply to me. If you don't have a pet, why are you looking in pet supplies? Interesting deal, they've got cat food 10% off...who gives a shit if you don't have a cat? An extension of this is when I'm stuck behind someone walking in an aisle that is moving as slowly as they possibly could be without coming to a full stop. You might not be in a hurry, but do you really need to block everyone else who might be?

8. The Parking Lot Patrons

Nearly everyone in a parking lot is a complete idiot and I'm pretty sure that I myself have fallen into this category multiple times as well. There's the guy that doesn't know if he's coming or going, so he'll just sit there with his lights on for 2 minutes while you camp out for his spot doing nothing. There's the woman who camps out for those spots for 5 minutes and will refuse to just move on in search for a new spot, even if there are multiple ones open that aren't too much further away. There's the oblivious people that walk right in front of your car and then look at you as if you came out of nowhere and they were just lucky enough to dodge your attempted vehicular manslaughter. What about the people that leave a shopping cart inside of a parking spot, so you have to get out to move it before you can pull in? Or that jerk that parks just far enough over the line that you can't park in that perfect spot?

9. The Person I Keep Passing By

By the third time I walk by the same person, I start to feel awkward. Are these people following me? Do they think I'm following them? Why are we coincidentally both looking for Ritz crackers, earphones, and belts? While I never feel awkward enough to become one of those people that feels the need to talk to them just because of this (see #1), it does get weird and it seems like something needs to be done. Extra points if you then do that thing where you're facing each other, walking down the aisle, and you both try to step around the other person but go the same way and nearly smack into each other. From then on in, you've both become near-collision buddies to the other person and you certainly are wary of how they keep popping up near you.

10. The Beggar

Thankfully, I live in an area that doesn't have homeless people hanging out in front of stores or walking around the mall. For those areas that do, I'm sure you know much more than I would about how annoying this could get. There's the issue of wanting to help but not being able to, and feeling like no matter how you could put it, you'd just look like an insensitive jerk in the process by turning them down, or there's just the cutoff where you don't give a shit and don't want to help but they still would be approaching you anyway. Instead of the homeless issue, the other ones are the situations I come across more often. For instance, my friend and I used to be complete mallrats when we were teenagers and we were asked more than you'd think to just give people money. This was in an era where cell phones weren't anywhere near as common as they are now (back in the old early 2000s, my my how time flies) so people would ask for change for the pay phones usually. Some people just thought they were entitled to get money from you. These people usually looked like they were the type that weren't smart enough to count their money properly in the first place. The Beggar also includes the person that asks you to bum a cigarette or if you have a light. This has been particularly confusing for me as I don't smoke, never have, never will, and yet I've still been told by people that I'm lying and that I have cigarettes that I'm just not willing to give to them for free (again, as if they're entitled to it). The only type of 'beggar' scenario I can think of that I find perfectly acceptable is if you're asking me if I have the time. Granted, in 2011, you pretty much should have a phone or a watch, or be able to find one of the thousand of other clocks all over the place as nearly everything is also a clock and an mp3 player now, but I still wouldn't mind someone asking me that.

So who am I forgetting about? Leave your comments below.

5 Reasons Why I Don't Like Thanksgiving

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:30:00 +0000

Thanksgiving is one of my least favorites of the major holidays. Why is that, exactly?

1. The Meal
I know, you might be thinking I'm crazy, as it's so popular. However, I'm not a fan of it. I'd rather have chicken than turkey, I'd rather have a baked potato than mashed potatoes, I don't like sweet potatoes/yams, nor do I like cranberry sauce. Most people are such avid fans of it that they look forward even to the leftovers. I, on the other hand, would much rather order a pizza. I like to see other people enjoying the meal - and if you like the food, you LOVE Thanksgiving - but when the holiday pretty much revolves around this as the focal point, if you're not a fan of it, the holiday just tanks.

2. Pilgrims & Indians
I could not care less about this portion of history. Sure, it's important. I'm not arguing against that. I just find it incredibly uninteresting and I always have, even as a kid. Both pilgrims and Indians look like fools. Plus, it isn't as if the story ever changes. It's just the same thing: bunch of people got together, ate some shit out of a horn, then systematically turned on each other and basically made the Native Americans an endangered race and the pilgrims eventually went on to do nonsense like the Salem Witch Trials. Nice job, idiots. Maybe you'd be able to think more clearly if you didn't have goddamn belt buckles on your heads.

3. Transitional Holiday
Thanksgiving is basically overshadowed. People are just getting off from Halloween and so much of the decoration has the same kind of feel to it, plus the weather hasn't quite changed yet, so it's almost as if it's just an extension. Thanksgiving becomes the "other half" of Halloween that you don't see. Since Halloween has no built-in dinner with family and Thanksgiving has no fun activities, they're about 50/50 (except Halloween has the ceremonial eating of candy). But even more so, Thanksgiving is overshadowed by Christmas. Very soon after Halloween, stores are removing their costumes and decorations and replacing them with Christmas gear. They're also playing Christmas music on the radio. Within hours after Thanksgiving has ended, people are doing Christmas shopping with Black Friday. Basically, Thanksgiving doesn't have enough to stand on its own. It's just a stepping stone between two better holidays.

4. The Message
I previously wrote in an older entry about how hypocritical the holiday message is. Give thanks for what you have, then after you say grace, stuff your face like a glutton.

5. The Hand-Turkey Drawings

Pitiful. Now go eat your mascot.

Memorandom: Yelling at the TV Screen

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:30:00 +0000

Here's a hint: when you yell at the television screen, the people inside of it can't hear you.

They're not interacting live with everyone's living room.

Sports teams will not hear your advice.

"Watch out!" will fall on deaf ears while watching a horror film.

Do you yell at books when you're reading them too?

You're stupid.

Why Should I Be Tipping 15-20%? Percent Over Service?

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 22:56:00 +0000

I have never understood the reasoning behind tipping a percentage based on the bill. It makes no sense in my mind.

Before we get started, let me clarify one thing that people are automatically thinking. No, I'm not against tipping in general. We all know that if a server is being paid less than minimum wage because of some predetermined estimation of their tips, then they need tips to survive on. I'm perfectly fine with that...even though I think it makes more sense to just make it a minimum wage job standardized and not have to bother with the tips.

What confuses me, though, is this concept that I should automatically tip you a percentage of the bill that I have, as opposed to tipping for your service. Your job is to take my order, check if I need anything, and give me my food, correct? Thus, I'm paying you for that service, not for the quality of the food, the cooking of the food, or anything in relation to that. If you do shit service, why should you be compensated as if you did an average job just because I have a bigger bill? Equally, if you do really good service, why should you be penalized just because I have a smaller bill?

Say I order a steak for $20 and a waiter brings out one plate. Another person, sitting at another table, orders a complicated but cheap breakfast for $10 that has 5 plates to it. Why should my waiter be paid more money than the other one for doing less work, just because my meal was more expensive? Would you pay a mechanic more money for labor if he spent 30 minutes installing a $2000 car part than if he spent 3 hours working on the car to fix something that only costs you $50? No!

I've never once gone out to eat at a restaurant and skipped out on tipping the waiter/waitress...even the ones that were complete assholes and didn't deserve anything. The lowest I've personally given was a dollar, and frankly, she didn't deserve that, considering she received a dollar from each person in my large group and treated us like a bitch the entire time. How does someone get offended when you order orange juice at 8 in the morning on a week day by saying "I'll have a large orange juice"? This same waitress flipped out at a friend of mine for asking if she needed any help with the distribution of the plates (of which there were many). The last thing she deserved was to get rewarded for my big breakfast.

So really, I'd like to hear a good argument for why I should pay more to a bad server just because I ordered a more expensive meal, and why I should pay less to a good server just because I ordered a glass of free water.

Violins are for the birds

5 Reasons I Suck At Gambling

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:21:00 +0000

I'm the first person to admit that when I have zero skill in something. Thus, here's an examination of one of the things I'm terrible at: gambling.

1. I'm a money-saver
For as long as I can remember, I've never been someone to really spend my money. Sure, if someone dropped a million dollars on my lap right now and told me it was mine, I already have a game plan set up for just exactly what I'd buy (and trust me, it's complicated and well thought out). However, since that has never happened to me, I save my money and I'm very frugal. When it comes to gambling, the first hump I'd have to get over would be spending the money in the first place. It's essential. You have to spend money in order to make it. To be fair, though, I disagree completely with Ben Franklin's "a penny saved is a penny earned" phrase. I don't see any extra $20 bills in my wallet from the ones I haven't spent. [You could argue that you earn through interest with banks, but the rates are so low it only really applies to people with a lot of money, and they can afford not to pay attention to those interest rates. Fuck you Ben Franklin.]

2. I overthink and second-guess myself
Remember how in the above part I said that I have a plan just in case someone gave me a million dollars? This is detrimental to my gambling abilities because I don't like to just trust my instincts on things. Once you figure out what you think is the right answer, you can't keep thinking of the alternatives. It's just like me to bet on red for 12 turns, see it come up black all 12 times, and consider switching to black instead of keeping it on red for probability's sake. That little doozy has hurt me in more ways than I can remember when it comes to gambling.

3. I'm too cautious
For many people, the sheer act of gambling is worth the money you're gambling with in the first place. In fact, I'd say most of the people I've asked in my life have said that if they went to a casino and lost all of the money they had gone there with, as long as they had fun, it was worth it. I, on the other hand, don't feel that way. I'm not a risk taker. I like to plot my moves out ahead of time and prepare for the worst, hope for the best, and expect something somewhere in the middle. To me, if I were to go to a casino with $100 in my wallet, gamble the entire night, and walk out with $110, I won, but if I walk out with $90, I lost and now I have to figure out where I'm going to make that 10 bucks back. It's a thrill ride when you put your money in a slot machine and you wait to see if you've hit the jackpot, but while for most people the thrill is of anticipation of the win, my mindset is more of an anxiety hoping that my coin lands heads-up.

4. I take losing very hard
I wouldn't necessarily say that I'm a sore loser, but I know full well that I'm not someone who can take a punch and then go about my day. If something bad happens, I dwell on it for a long time. If I say or do something stupid, I beat myself up about it and I haunt myself with it. Some other people are able to eat a loss, grit their teeth, and then brush it off and move on. If you're gambling and you lose a couple hands of blackjack, you might think to yourself that it sucks but "the next hand, I'm going to make it all back". I typically run to the thought of hating the fact that I lost those previous hands and trying to figure out what went wrong, how I can correct it in the future (overthinking again) and then my day is ruined.

5. I'm too nice
It may seem otherwise, but I'm actually a really nice guy. This is a huge downfall when it comes to a game like poker where you're looking out for yourself and screwing everyone else over. If you were to ask me what I'd rather do, be the sole winner out of a poker table and be able to gloat about it or make it so everyone wins the same amount of money, I'd rather everyone win. Now, of course, it's a different story if you're asking if I'd like to split the money I've won on my own with other people. Sorry, not going to happen. But I don't like to haggle with salesmen because I know that, even though I want to get the lowest price possible, I also don't want to screw them out of their commission that they worked for. I'm not saying you need to be MEAN to gamble, nor am I saying that nice people can't win money (especially since slot machines and roulette wheels are, you know, inanimate objects and you can't hurt their feelings - unless they're in a Disney movie and anthropomorphic...I digress) but if you're worrying about the person next to you and whether they look like they deserve to win some money as opposed to whether they have a better hand of cards than you do, there goes your poker face. Please insert your Lady Gaga joke here.

So there you have it, an explanation of why I'm terrible at gambling. If you can avoid these pitfalls and you have a lot of help from Lady Luck on your side, then by all means, hit up http://hu.partypoker.com/ and go for it. If you find yourself in the same position that I'm in, on the losing side, maybe we can start a club together...but you're paying.

Nobody Sings the National Anthem Properly

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:00:00 +0000

Considering the date, I had a bit of a dilemma. How do I write something about September 11th and/or America that isn't patronizing and lame but also doesn't cross the line into rude and offensive? The last thing I would want to do is write some trite "remember 9/11" thing like everyone seems to do just because it's the popular thing as opposed to actually feeling something about it. On the other hand, despite how some people think otherwise, the purpose of Out on Limbs is NOT to piss you off - it's to make you think - so I wouldn't want to put something out there that would seem as if I'm making light of the attacks or that I'm insensitive to the lives that were lost. If I can't even write a post about how I'm not a fan of Elvis without people going psycho on me, I certainly can't talk about the struggling American spirit without people wrongly thinking I'm anti-USA. Eventually, a topic came to my mind that I think can work...

Why is it that nobody sings the National Anthem properly anymore?

Now, you might be able to argue that since each version of it is a cover, and you could technically do anything with YOUR cover of a song, that there’s no “proper” way to sing the National Anthem (or any song for that matter). I beg to differ, though, on the principle that with other songs, if you alter the lyrics, it’s acceptable, but if you were to change the lyrics of the Star Spangled Banner, I’m sure there would be an outrage.

What bothers me is how everyone goes crazy with their rendition as if just to draw attention to themselves. The most important thing isn't that YOU are singing it, it's that you are singing the National Anthem, is it not? Otherwise, if the purpose was to get that specific singer and nothing else, then why would they always sing the National Anthem instead of just any kind of a song? I understand that if you're a singer, you want to show off your skills, but that in itself is questionable in my mind. Is it really showing off talent if you're doing those ridiculous trills and you sound like some wannabe diva that is trying too hard? Having a singer twist it all around for the sake of showing off is selfish and it removes integrity from the song because it means that they think it's more important for themselves to seem flamboyant than to present the song in its best way. You're not singing at an American Idol competition. [Sidebar: When is that fucking show going to end already?]

Some songs just are what they are, and if you do too much vibrato or screw with the tempo or anything, it just ruins it. If I want to hear Bohemian Rhapsody, I want to hear Bohemian Rhapsody, not a song that has a bunch of filler mumbling just to seem fancy. That's one of my criticisms of a lot of hip hop and rap music - that they add nonsense words and phrases into it for no reason. Can Pitbull go a full song without saying "dali"? Can someone sing the National Anthem where they just sing it as its written as opposed to throwing in a lot of pauses and trying their best to SHOUT the lyrics?

Agree or disagree? Are you a fan of all the extra stuff people throw into singing the Star Spangled Banner, or do you side with me in thinking they should stick to the formula?

The original lyrics as written by Francis Scott Key

Naked & Shy with Underwear vs Bikini Swimsuits

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Sat, 20 Aug 2011 14:30:00 +0000

Why is it that people are shy when it comes to someone seeing them in their underwear yet they have no problem with people seeing them in their bathing suit? This is yet another example of something that people do that makes NO sense to me.

Take note that I'm not talking about the people that are embarrassed about their bodies and don't want people to see them in either...that makes sense. I'm also not talking about see-through lingerie (but you clearly did buy that for someone else to look at anyway), nor am I talking about you having holes or stains or just flat out ugly attire that you don't want people to see. What I am talking about is situations like this:

Thank you, Google Image Search, in more ways than one ;)

Is she wearing a bikini or is that a bra and a pair of panties? Does it fucking matter? It's the same thing!

If you're showing off the same amount of skin, why is one considered not a big deal but the other one is shameful and you have reservations about it?

This goes for guys too. Some guys would be apprehensive to let someone see them in their boxers/briefs/whatever but have no qualms about walking around in broad daylight in their bathing suit trunks. Again, you're showing off the same amount of skin, so what's the problem? Then there's the speedo, in which case you're covering LESS, so that throws everything out the window.

I'll tell you why people do this: people have convinced themselves that underwear is "secretive" and thus, needs to be concealed, and if someone can see them in their underwear, they're "exposed". They don't think rationally that they're just as equally exposed when they go swimming.

There are situations where you'd be embarrassed to have someone even see you in a bathing suit, so you'd equally be embarrassed about the underwear scenario. For instance, nobody bats an eye if you're in a bikini at the beach. Those same people would be confused as hell if you were in a bikini at a funeral or giving a conference speech. If you're frequently finding yourself in these environments with either your bathing suit OR just your underwear on, then you've got far bigger problems than just feeling naked!

If you're the type of person that thinks this way, please, leave a comment below and explain to me how two identical types of clothing that show the same amount of skin aren't equal in terms of nudity.

You Died from Drugs, Not Demons

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:47:00 +0000

With the recent death of Amy Winehouse people are constantly repeating a phrase that irks me: that someone who died from drug abuse was "haunted by demons".

I'm so sick of people trying to lessen the blow of people that overdose or otherwise die from drug abuse. You knew exactly what you were getting into as you were told time and time again for years about how drugs are bad, yet you made the choice to do them anyway. No, you can't blame a hard life leading you to drugs as that doesn't fix anything and that means that you were just too weak and stupid and decided to make your life worse. You had all the information you needed to make the choice and yet you decided to take the risk and now you're dead. The only reason you're dead is because you fucked up and did something that you knew was wrong and you died because of it, just the same as if I were to jump out of an airplane without a parachute and die on impact.

But for some reason, this politically correct overly sensitive world we live in gets so butt-hurt when it comes to issues like this and everyone starts trying to twist things to sound better. One of these ridiculous things people have decided to do is say that someone who died from drugs didn't "die like they knew they were taking the risk of doing", no, they "lost their battle with their demons". Excuse me? Succumbed to fucking DEMONS?

Look, I know you're trying to be metaphorical and try to make it out like it's something that it isn't just so you feel better about yourselves but that's not the way to go about things. People go to drugs because of problems, yes, but give me a fucking break. You people make this out to be like these drug addicts were possessed and mind-controlled into doing drugs without their choice and they simply lost some valiant battle that they struggled with, as if they're some fucking superhero that died trying to save a burning building filled with children and puppies. These people are messed up for whatever reason and decided that instead of seeking help, they'd just turn to an option that they knew 100% was not healthy and could potentially lead to death. Then they weren't lucky enough to scoot by and be overlooked by the statistics and they died - because of the deadly shit they were putting in their bodies. THAT'S IT. You might say that they were "out of control" because they didn't have the mental fortitude to NOT fall into drugs, but you're just enabling the other people out there. Unless you live under a rock, you know drugs are bad and not to get into them in the first place and even if you're stupid enough to go "meh, it won't hurt me", you know that there are rehab facilities and other methods of treatment that you shouldn't be ignoring. After that, you're on your own buddy.

So you want to argue that if someone doesn't have the right state of mind to have the willpower and intelligence to stay away from drugs or accept treatment, that they're falling victim to some "demons" that control them? Then think of it the following way: If someone's told for 15 years that you could potentially be killed if you shoot yourself in the head or at the very least, nothing positive can come from it, and then that person goes ahead and does it and they die, are you going to say that that person just "fell victim to some demons that controlled their mind and prevented them from knowing better" or are you going to say "Jesus Christ, that person was a fucking idiot that knew the risk and they got exactly what they should have known was coming"?

Drugs are bad. You know this. Everyone knows this. Everyone has known this since they were in elementary school. Yet if you still decide to ignore all that information and go ahead and do it, then it doesn't matter what your excuse is, you got what you deserved. This is exactly the same as the person who has no right to complain about gaining weight when they eat nothing but unhealthy fatty foods and don't exercise. This is exactly the same as the person who is allergic to cats and decides to own a cat and now bitches and complains about their allergies bothering them. Mental disorders are tough to kick, I understand that, but there's a difference between trying to diagnose whether or not you need help for depression or schizophrenia and whether or not you need help with drugs - the drugs are something you can flat out see and you know for a fact you're doing, and if you're using ANY drugs, you've got some sort of issues you need help with. If you choose to get into that mess in the first place and then you choose to ignore any kind of help, then you no longer have a chemical imbalance in your brain to blame it all on. Take responsibility, because it is YOUR fault, and you've gone from a person with emotional problems to just someone who is being foolish and careless.

They tried to make her go to rehab but she said no, no no...and now she's dead, because that's what fucking happens.

If you or someone you know is in need of help, there are numerous drug detox program options available to you that can put you on the right track. And in case you're wondering, none of them require an exorcism.

Big Brother 13 Cast First Impressions

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 03:30:00 +0000

Even though this blog isn't primarily an entertainment industry kind of site, it IS an opinion one. Seeing as how I try to incorporate reviews (opinions) and social commentary (opinions), Big Brother is the type of show I love to watch (seeing as how it's a big social experiment). Plus, since I've done this before on this site, I might as well do it again, so here are my first impressions for the 13th season of Big Brother.

First off...goddamn, 13 seasons?

So let's take a look at the twists. First off, there's the duos. I'm not exactly as shocked about that as some other people are, considering we've seen people compete as a team in a previous season. The same goes for bringing back former house guests. Now, what does interest me is their new eviction rules with this "golden key" scenario. What happens if someone wins POV? Can they take their whole duo down or just one person? If so, then what happens?

Time to rundown the house guests. WARNING: My opinions generally change for 75% of the people after the first week or so, so don't hold me to these as if they're my only viewpoints that will remain immobile. That's part of the fun, though, getting to know these people over the summer and finding out that some jerks are decent and some seemingly cool people are total assholes.

THE NEW:

Adam
Adam seems okay to me. I wouldn't peg him as a real threat in the game quite yet but he might have some potential.
GAME FORECAST: He'll be eliminated as a casualty when they're targeting someone else that week.

Cassi
Cassi is hot. I'll be paying quite a bit of attention to her ;) Thankfully she doesn't seem like a typical "sexy bimbo" combination, so I might not end up hating her, as I can't tolerate those types of people. If she stays the way she's been in this first episode, I hope she stays a long time.
GAME FORECAST: Cassi will get into an argument with someone that will throw her for a loop and cause her to lose control of her game and it will unravel because of that. What do I have to back this theory up? Nothing, just a random guess.

Dominic
No problems with Dominic, though he might get a little too cocky. His best bet is to strike an alliance with some women as he'll definitely be sought after by the guys, so he can have both sides in his pocket.
GAME FORECAST: Dominic could be the "strong physical competitor" target throughout the game and that's something that will be difficult to shake off.

Kalia
Kalia is annoying me. She seems to think of herself as the life of the party and someone that deserves a ton of attention but I can't see why as it doesn't seem like she's entitled to it. I hope she proves me wrong, or gets knocked out soon.
GAME FORECAST: Kalia will definitely get into arguments and develop a bitchy attitude towards certain people that she'll target above all others. She'll be so focused that she'll paint a huge target on her back and everyone she's aligned with well be more than welcome to let her take all the heat.

Keith
Poor Keith. Poor, poor Keith. You're going to get eaten alive by the women in this house. You're going to think with your penis, try too hard to flirt and value that over anything else, and in the end it will bite you in the ass. You'll try to play it smooth and it won't work.
GAME FORECAST: No chance.

Lawon
Lawon hasn't shown much in terms of competition but he could easily be someone that is flamboyant enough for people to notice, but not threatening enough to stay under the radar and then come out swinging. He could be someone to watch out for.
GAME FORECAST: Fight with Kalia is eventual. Team up with Jordan may happen.

Porsche
The time I won't be inspecting Cassi, I'll be checking out Porsche. What can I say, I'm a guy, and she's hot too. Porsche is going to be much better on her own than with a partner I think, and I can definitely see her getting into an alliance with someone like Cassi but then stabbing her in the back.
GAME FORECAST: Eliminated around the 60% point of the season.

Shelly
I hope Shelly doesn't take it easy and fall back on the "frail old woman can't win challenges so let's keep her around" strategy that others have done in the past. Shelly doesn't seem annoying, though, so I wouldn't mind her sticking around and actually giving it a good fight.
GAME FORECAST: Shelly will probably last a while through the typical pity of bad in challenges and accompanied alliances with the women that view her as a motherly figure.

THE OLD:

Jeff & Jordan
I don't know why everyone was so in love with these two. I wasn't. Therefore, I won't mind to see them leave.
GAME FORECAST: Jordan will probably stay around a long time again due to how bad she is at competitions and how she isn't a threat, and Jeff will have a target on his back.

Dick & Daniele
Dick is one of my 3 favorite players of all time, so I'm incredibly excited to see him again and naturally, I'm rooting for him to win. He doesn't need it, but hell, he's cool. Daniele I'm not as fond of so I won't mind to see her go but not before some others. Here's hoping Dick stays until the finals, if not just for some more episodes of the Dick At Night Show.
GAME FORECAST: They'll get screwed over and Dick will be eliminated as he's the bigger threat. Daniele will make it until about the 75% point and get knocked out.

Brendon & Rachel
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Goddamn, I swear, Rachel is my least favorite person ever in the history of this show and I could not stand these two. That isn't in a "I love to hate them" way. That's in a "I guess I'm not watching as often" way. I seriously find her irritating beyond belief. Even worse, the fact that she won the first HOH means I need to definitely withstand 2 weeks of her. This will not do. I can only hope that she's gone very, very fast....like the second week....or else I'll conveniently have other things to do instead of watching as often. Brendon is much more tolerable but I want to see him gone too.
GAME FORECAST: Unfortunately I won't get my wish and they'll both probably stay here as long as possible, which will irk the fuck out of me.

Why couldn't there have been Will and Boogie, or Dan and Memphis, or Eric and America, or shit, ANYBODY but Brendon and Rachel? Damn you, Big Brother!

WINNER PREDICTION: It's a real shot in the dark, but I'm going to pick Dominic. I think he'll be able to forge alliances with people and keep himself off the block with POV wins and then earn the votes by being the one who competed more.

Jackass Star Ryan Dunn Dies in Car Crash

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:36:00 +0000

Apparently, Ryan Dunn, star of the TV and film series Jackass has been killed in a car crash along with his passenger.

My first comment is that that sucks, as I'm a fan of the show and I never had a reason to dislike Ryan Dunn personally (especially since I've never met the guy). Any time someone dies, on top of if they've done work that you enjoy, it's always a bummer.

Then, of course, comes the other part. Knowing the show, you've got to assume it wasn't some random chance thing. These guys are stuntmen and risk takers that have cheated death dozens upon dozens of times and owe more than a little to pure blind luck. It wouldn't be shocking at all to me to hear that Dunn was speeding and trying to play daredevil when it happened. This next piece of information didn't shock me at all, either:

Sources say that he was heavily drinking before the accident and tweeted this picture, leading to the assumption that this is all the byproduct of drunk driving.

In such a situation, all my pity is drained from Dunn himself. For the passenger and for Dunn's family and friends, my condolences go out to them, of course, as losing someone is difficult. However, for Ryan Dunn, if he was indeed killed as a result of his own drunk driving, the pity train stops before picking him up. Anybody who has read my previous entries knows that I'm against drugs and alcohol and if you have any negative consequences that come out of it, you knew what you were getting yourself into when you signed up, as they're not only easily avoidable and COMPLETELY a choice but they're a choice that you're told has no positive outcome since you're a child, so you can't even use the excuse nowadays that they had back decades ago where they can say that they didn't know how harmful the substances were. A drug addict overdoses - they shouldn't have taken the first hit of the drug in the first place. An alcoholic dies from alcohol poisoning - they didn't need to drink to begin with. Ryan Dunn, if he in fact did die as a result of drunk driving, knew exactly what he was getting into both when he was drinking and when he decided to drive afterward. It's just a shame that he had to make that mistake, particularly when it comes to what happened to the passenger.

Now, if this is not true, and Dunn was killed in some other fashion and was not inebriated in some way, then by proxy I don't blame him. Hell, there's even people claiming that this is all yet another Jackass stunt - though to be fair, I don't really buy into that and I'll believe it when I see it. I'd love for that to be the real story here in that they'd pull off something like that and the joke would be on us, not only because it would mean that two people didn't die from a car accident but also that they pushed the boundaries of celebrity news reporting, but I wouldn't hold out hope for that to be true.

Anything new I hear about this that is noteworthy I'll update this post with.

Remember, if you or anyone you know is in need of help for drug/alcohol/whatever addiction, there are resources you can go to and check out that get things sorted out for you. The staff of a drug and alcohol treatment center can try its best to help people who seem bent on following a self-destructive path. Listen to the warnings before Jackass - don't try this stuff on your own...or, well, you see what happens.

Did You Survive the May 21, 2011 Apocalypse?

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Sat, 21 May 2011 22:43:00 +0000

Of course you did.

The problem here is blind devotion. It doesn't JUST happen with religion, but religion seems to be the biggest mass attractor to this type of following. Step one, some guy named Harold Camping interprets the Bible in a way that makes him think that May 21, 2011 is the Rapture. He already has no proof that the Bible is definitive, but believes in it. [Note: I'm not trying to say that the Bible is 100% wrong...just that without proof, you shouldn't believe in it 100%, just as you shouldn't completely count it out if you haven't disproved it yet] He then believes, without proof, that his interpretation is correct. We all fuck up when interpreting shit. I used to think for YEARS that the lyrics of "Papa's Got a Brand New Bag" were "Papa's Got a Brand New Back". I was wrong. But Harry there believes in his interpretation and lets everyone know. Admirable in the sense that if he were right, he at least warned us. I'm not knocking him there. But I am knocking the people that went "OMG, some dude thinks the world is going to end....AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!"

The International Business Times is reporting that Camping might have even gone into hiding out of embarrassment from this, because, well, you know...falsely predicting the apocalypse is bad business. Why not man-up and admit that you were wrong? Everyone already knows it. You're not hiding anything. It reminds me of elementary school when you would see that a kid pissed himself and he'd try to blame it on the toilet water splashing up and soaking his pants - something none of us have ever seen yet it apparently happened this one poor kid like once a month and conveniently only ever wet his pants and nothing else. When you put yourself out there and it's obvious that you're wrong, just admit it. You're not saving face by lying. In fact, you're losing your credibility even more so, cause now not only are you WRONG but you are also a liar on top of it. Camping hiding isn't the same as lying, but we'll see what happens when it comes to that, especially considering how I've come across articles recently that said some believers of this apocalypse would stick to the date no matter what, even if it passed. "So, Harold, remember that apocalypse yesterday that didn't happen?" / "Yes it did. You just blinked."

Believe in whatever religion you want, or DON'T believe in whatever religion you want, but just be smart enough to realize that you should never dive into anything without testing the waters. Countless numbers of people have tried to predict the End of Days in the past and the track record isn't exactly good for them, so what made you think that this would be any different? Could it have been? Sure. But do you also panic every time you take a bite of food because you could potentially choke on it? You can't live your life like that - otherwise, there's no life to be taken away if/when the apocalypse would happen.

Aw, since this seems a little too sincere at the end there, I need to balance it with something rude:

Wait wait wait, that isn't funny enough. Here we go:

It is the dawning of the Age of Apocalypse!

Thor Movie Reviewpoint

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Fri, 06 May 2011 07:35:00 +0000

I've been a Comic Con type of guy my whole life, so I feel a sense of devotion to see the films and television shows associated with the products I'm aware and a fan of. Thor has always been one of those things that I considered a bit of a burden. Give me Batman, Spider-Man, X-Men, Superman, and many many others before you give me Thor. When they announced the whole Avengers concept, I was looking forward to it and despite my history of not being the biggest supporter of Thor, I obviously was hoping the character would be in it. When the movie was announced, I knew I'd see it no matter what, but figured I would have to just bite the bullet and spend 10 dollars on crap.

Thankfully, this was better than I expected. Once Kenneth Branagh was involved, I thought "this is going to be the best possible Thor movie...but it'll still suck" and ended up leaving with the thought that "that was probably the best possible Thor movie...and that was pretty good".

WARNING: SOME SPOILERS AHEAD.

STORY: Thor kind of lays between a Shakespearean play and a comic book film. You have your typical action sequences and such, but the core is predominantly about sibling rivalries, trying to please your parents, and growing up. You can basically remake this movie without the special effects and turn it into a drama about two immature teenagers and a family business. I think Branagh understood that and turned the volume up, giving it much more than just a "smash'em fiasco" that some superhero stories turn out to be. Nice job.

ACTING: I was surprised to see so many big (or relatively big) names attached to this film until it dawned upon me that they were all doing it for the chance to work with Branagh. Natalie Portman basically said that on repeat when asked why she did the film. It wasn't the idea of being in a comic book movie or that people loved the Thor character that drew them in, it was Branagh. It pays off as you can get quality actors that help promote the film and give it the sense of importance that it needs to stay relevant and pull it all off. Chris Hemsworth in my mind played Thor to a T (no pun intended but if you appreciate it, good for you) and I really have nothing bad to say about any other performances as well. Tom Hiddleston nails Loki. Anthony Hopkins nails Odin. Clark Gregg is once again charming as Agent Coulson. The reality of it may be that there are no Oscar performances, but everyone does their job well. One thing I found particularly interesting was just how little of Rene Russo we got to see, considering how many big name stars end up pushing for more scenes for themselves at the expense of the film. That would have been needless and they avoided doing that, so her role is very limited, but serves the purpose.

MUSIC: Even though I tried several times to take notice of the music, I honestly couldn't find anything that stood out. To me, this was one of the weak points of the film. There's no Thor Theme stuck in my head at the moment.

VISUALS: Visually speaking, I don't think you can really ask for more. The costumes, while elaborate and a bit silly looking at times, are from a different civilization and you get the feel that there's continuity amongst that (ie, everyone wears similar attire but different enough that you can see they all have their personal touches and that it would come from Asgardian culture). The special effects don't look cheap or unrealistic either. If I had one gripe about the visuals it would be that mostly all of the 3D elements were pointless. I don't see the need to have characters pop out in 3D effect unless it's something that would be exciting - not just two people having a conversation.

ENTERTAINMENT: Superhero films are almost always entertaining without fail. This is definitely a summer popcorn flick that kept me entertained the whole way through. It will probably get some criticism from people saying that there isn't enough action, but for me, it had enough to satisfy my needs and not overdo it.

NITPICKING/APPLAUDING:

1. I enjoyed the Donald Blake references.

2. No Enchantress?

3. Hawkeye....meh. Look, it's better to have Hawkeye than just Guard #3, but to me, there was nothing to get excited about. He was just Guard #3 with a bow.

4. Thank GOD they chose the more modern Thor outfit instead of the bright blue and whatnot.

REVIEWPOINT: HIT. It's no Batman Begins, or Spider-Man, or even Iron Man in my mind, but it exceeded my expectations and I don't feel as though the money I spent on the ticket was a waste. I may not ever buy it, but I'm very glad to have watched it.

Donald Trump & President Obama's Birth Certificate

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 19:21:00 +0000

President Obama called it a distraction and that's exactly what it is. First off, this whole 'Donald Trump running for office' thing is nothing but a publicity angle and if you don't see that, you should probably stop reading this article right now because you're more than likely too stupid to understand the big words I'm using like "nonsense". This whole Trump campaign is just orchestrated to get people talking about him in a higher sense so in the future, everyone can refer to him as being a potential candidate for the highest office in the country. Also, think about this: if you don't like the guy at all and you don't like anything he does (which it seems like most people are willing to admit) why would you buy into this and give him what he wants?

On top of that, the whole "birther movement" is beyond ridiculous. The same people that think the government is this damn near infallible Big Brother-esque power machine also think that Barack Obama was able to make it up to the fucking PRESIDENCY without proof of having been born here???? Jesus Christ, people, you have to pick one thing or the other. If you're willing to believe that you could get that deep into our country's infrastructure with fake records, you have to admit that our country is so incredibly inept that there's no chance at rebuilding our prestige and economy. Why? Because anybody that goes out for college grant money knows that the FAFSA isn't the only thing you need and it takes absolutely forever to go through all the paperwork and documentary proofs just to get a few bucks off your books each semester, and that's absolutely nothing in comparison to becoming President of the United States. If the colleges that don't know what they're doing are better at this than the fact-checkers for the Senate and so forth, we're doomed as a country. I bet many of you could be transported back in time to watch the birth and still not be convinced.

*On another note, yes, I voted for Obama and I supported his positions, but that doesn't make me a blind suck-up to him.

*And on another note, anybody that is bitching right now that the economy isn't fixed and thinks they wasted their vote on Obama in the first place must have been stupid enough to think that Obama's election process was enough to cure all the problems in a year or so instead of being realistic. Bush was the driver in the car, Obama is the passenger, and Bush drove it into oncoming traffic and jumped out at the last second, leaving Obama with the responsibility of jumping into the driver's seat and trying to navigate safely out of the interstate. Don't blame the problems that come with the job on the guy that just got the job - blame it on the guy who caused the problems in the first place.

Ina Garten Doesn't Make-A-Wish

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 23:39:00 +0000

Take Food Network celebrity chef Ina Garten, mix her with the Make-A-Wish Foundation, and add a little bad publicity and you have a recipe for disaster. I'll give you a second to digest that awesome pun...and this one.

Here's an easy question you should all know the answer to: you're the star of a cooking show and a terminally ill kid uses his Make-A-Wish opportunity to ask if he can meet you and have a cooking lesson...do you accept or decline?

Naturally, you accept....unless you're Ina Garten, of course. I'm not a fan of the Food Network as I'm not a fan of cooking, I'm a picky eater, and I don't find the shows to be particularly entertaining, especially when the star involved looks more like Roseanne Barr and isn't one of those hot ones like that Giada De Laurentiis or Rachel Ray or whatever. I have, however, seen one episode of this woman's show. I found it boring like the rest, but hey, some people like that, and I couldn't really criticize the woman herself because literally her whole persona was nothing but "I enjoy cooking and eating and it makes me happy". Well, now I can criticize her, as it's fucked up to turn down a Make-A-Wish offer.

She turns it down, then realizes it's a bad PR move, says she'll do it, and good for the family, they reject her and let everyone know about it. Obviously, that doesn't help the kid's health problems, but it does make sure that Garten doesn't get away with snubbing him. Unless there's some weird misunderstanding that happened (like she said she couldn't do a specific day and her manager said "she can't do that" and they took it as "no"), then it clearly is a case where she didn't want to do it, realized after the fact that it would look bad for her career, and then agreed to do it merely to try to save face, and that's one of the big issues here. Make-A-Wish and other charities aren't supposed to be about you granting the wish, they're supposed to be about the people getting it. Sure, you can donate money to charity and write it off for your taxes, which is good (and the absolute best motivator for people to do it) but the primary focus should always be on the cause itself. That's the reason the charity exists. If it were just a money laundering firm for rich people or simply an organization devoted to making celebrities look like nicer people then we wouldn't be talking about it, would we?

Look, it's a complicated relationship between fans and celebrities and sometimes, it gets a little confusing. I've always been of the opinion that both sides need to compromise for the opposite. For instance, if you're a celebrity and someone asks you for an autograph, if you're not busy, you should sign it. You won't remember that one person, but for the rest of their life, that person will remember meeting you and it could mean a lot. However, a fan shouldn't pester you if you're busy, and they should understand that sometimes, you're in a bad mood, sometimes you really DO have no time to sign autographs, and you really do want to just sit and eat your meal at a restaurant without being bothered. Celebrities naturally have to understand that they're in the public spotlight, but at the same time, the paparazzi is way too invasive to a ridiculous level. When it comes to issues like fame, things get tricky because you're dealing with always being "on" and not slipping up because you have to maintain a positive image (or, you know, start your whole career with a negative image like a sex tape and gaining fame through being a slut). It's stupid that celebrities can't be themselves and if they say one little controversial thing, suddenly they have to apologize for it even if they don't mean it, do a bunch of PR work and image enhancement training and pretend to go to rehab for anger issues or whatever. HOWEVER...a situation like this is really odd. Forgive the stereotyping here, but a little boy typically would be more interested in meeting a sports figure or an actor or something, generally speaking. If you were to ask most little boys what their celebrity wish meeting would be, they'd probably say something like Lebron James or Megan Fox or something, not a TV chef. Then, when you couple in the fact that the kid most likely only has a short amount of time to live and they chose this one thing to be that big event in their life that they get as compensation for a short time on the earth...PR shouldn't even really be an issue. It should be a no-brainer to go along with it just out of being a decent human being. If an old person fell down, you'd help them up even if you weren't in the public eye and had an image to maintain, correct?

Normally, this blog is about me being the asshole and pointing out stuff that people might not necessarily be willing to say on their own - or me just being an asshole to be funny - but I thought it would be a nice change of pace to point out things from a more optimistic point of view, especially when it helps get the story out that someone was acting like the type of person that screws this world up.

Movie Piracy and Why It Makes Sense

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:39:00 +0000

Let me set the scene: I watch dozens upon dozens of movies a year. I've been a member of the AMC MovieWatcher program for as long as I've had a wallet. Imagine how often it would come in handy for both of us, when I would get a coupon for a free popcorn and decide to take advantage of it by going to the theater. You get a few bucks of my money for the ticket, some more for a drink and other candy, and then the same for people I'm with that don't have that coupon. Eventually, I'd get a free movie ticket. This of course would result in me paying for my concession stand stuff and the people that I'm seeing the movie with, again, paying for everything full price. Sweet deal, win/win.

Today, I get a notice in the mail saying that they're ending that program and replacing it with something new: something they claim will offer me MORE rewards. Awesome! Oh wait a second...the MovieWatcher thing used to be totally free, and now they're charging me $12? Wait, that's not a reward. Oh, and now, it takes $100 spent to get $10 back in rewards? Seriously? That means you have to spend $200 in a year at the theater just to see a grand saving of...you guessed it, 8 dollars. Holy shit, what an awesome reward!

This is the type of thing that is hilarious to me. We're in a crippling economy where literally the only trend is that people have less money so they're spending less and looking for bargains, and these companies think they can make up for it by UPPING their prices. And yes, that's on a regular basis, too. A few years ago, AMC used to charge $5 a ticket. Then it was $5.50. Now it's $10. What does that mean? That means now, I don't go see movies out anymore.

A note to all businesses that are struggling right now: if people aren't buying your product because they already think it costs too much to justify, charging MORE is going to result in LESS customers. What's better, selling 1 ticket for ten bucks or selling 2 tickets for 8? Or selling 3 tickets for 7? Or what about getting a family of 4 for 5 dollars a piece so you're getting $20 out of them just for the tickets alone, plus each person wanting popcorn and candy and drinks?

This is why people use the internet to pirate movies and music. There's no justification to spend that much money when you have an alternative which, albeit illegal, is totally free. You want to build up a better customer service relationship and get me to come back and spend more money at your place? Show that you give a shit about my business and not that you're trying to screw me over because you think I'm an idiot that can't count. If all you see is dollar signs and you care nothing about the customer satisfaction and just want them to empty their wallets, then the response is going to be the customers doing the same. They'll start looking at you through their own dollar signs and how you're taking it away from them. Fair is fair. If I'm nothing but a money plus to you, then you're nothing but a money minus to me. What's the only thing better than a boycott when you're upset with someone? Getting the product without paying for it - which is exactly what people are doing when it comes to intangible purchases like this. In one fell swoop, AMC went from being my favorite of the chain theatres to being one I completely have lost respect for. You know what else they've lost? My ten bucks the next time I want to see a movie.

Justin Timberlake & Jessica Biel Split Up - Who Cares?

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 05:10:00 +0000

So I click on over to Google News to see if there's anything worth talking about today and of course, all I really see is about the tsunami - which I'm not knocking at all. That's some heavy news and it deserves the focus. There's just nothing for me to talk about on this site in regards to something like that. So I scroll to one of the other headlines and apparently, the second biggest story going on right now is that Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel have split up.

Why is this important?

I've never understood why there's this fascination when it comes to celebrities where people want to know every little thing about them. They're just people...and I guarantee, the average celebrity would like to be treated (on a regular basis) as if they're just a normal person. Sure, they like the extravagance. Who wouldn't? But it takes a certain type of person to want to divulge everything about themselves and be in the public eye 24/7, and I doubt that most of them feel that way.

Speculation afoot: why did they break up? Did someone cheat? Blah blah blah. It's none of our business! And why do you give a shit anyway? In what possible realm does a celebrity breaking up with another celebrity have any effect on your life?

It doesn't. Now stop worrying about what shoes Lady Gaga just purchased or seeing pictures of some new celebrity baby with a retarded name (Apple Paltrow? Suri Mapother?) and all that other bullshit and go about the rest of your day.

P.S.: Jessica, if you're looking for a rebound, contact form's up above ;)

Skinny Pepsi Can Causes Poor Self-Esteem

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Sun, 13 Feb 2011 04:10:00 +0000

So apparently, Pepsi's new "skinny can" is pissing people off. They're advertising it as a "taller, sassier" version that celebrates "beautiful, confident women"...yet people are bitching and complaining, saying Pepsi is promoting poor body image ideals.

Come the fuck on, people. Dangerous stereotypes of body image, just for saying SKINNY? You do realize that being overweight is a bad thing, right? And it isn't "the anorexic can", it's the skinny can. If Pepsi started using the tagline "If you're over 90 pounds, you're ugly", then I could see people getting upset, but seriously, everyone needs to knock it off with this hyper-sensitivity when it comes to supporting people that aren't fat. We've gotten into this stupid rut of people latching onto the phrase that "real women" aren't skinny, as if being physically fit is something unattainable and alien to us and should be shunned upon rather than sought after. It's so much easier to just bitch that it's someone else's fault for making you feel bad that you're fat rather than admit that you are the reason you're fat, and then go out and lose the weight, isn't it? Now we're blaming Pepsi? Here's a hint: if you're too fat, STOP DRINKING SO MUCH FUCKING SODA IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Now, I'll criticize Pepsi itself for one thing here, and it isn't the idea of "skinny = outrageous expectations = Pepsi is the devil for not telling me it's ok to eat another pie" because I'm not a goddamn moron, it's the idea of this promotion existing in the first place. Jill Beraud, the chief marketing officer for PepsiCo (aka, "big pay check person") said: "Our slim, attractive new can is the perfect complement to today's most stylish looks, and we're excited to throw its coming-out party during the biggest celebration of innovative design in the world", New York's Fashion Week. My problem here is simple: IT'S A FUCKING SODA CAN. Why is it being mentioned for a fashion show? And who decided that the can itself needed sex appeal in the first place? Does your product suck so bad that you need to try to get people to look at the can and want to fuck it after they're done drinking it? If so...you've got one weird ass marketing team....and some weird ass clientele if they follow the formula and comply with that methodology. Right now I've got a bottle of Gatorade next to me and nope, it doesn't make me feel any skinnier, fatter, or God forbid, hornier.

What's next? Is McDonalds going to come under fire from the fat asses that super-size everything because they feel sad that some people are ordering a "small" fry? If your self-esteem is so shot about your weight that the idea of a thinner soda can has you upset, maybe you should have one of those cans sitting next to you the next time you're scarfing down a bucket of fried chicken. Everyone needs their motivators.

Marry, Fuck, or Kill: Catwoman Edition (Hathaway, Meriwether, Pfeiffer)

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 16:30:00 +0000

With news of Anne Hathaway being cast as Selina Kyle in the upcoming The Dark Knight Rises, I figured what the hell, let's do another "Marry, Fuck, or Kill"...this time, the CATWOMAN edition.

Insert "pussy" joke. You knew it was coming. Don't judge me.

Now, more than 3 people have portrayed the character. How to narrow it down? I could have done the 3 women from the Adam West series, but then that wouldn't included Hathaway, now would it? The voice actresses are out considering I don't know what any of them look like aside from Gina Gershon (totally a fuck by the way). Kimberly Page doesn't get any credit for the short fan film Grayson (despite how cool that was and how hot she is). And no true fan could possibly count the Halle Berry film as being Catwoman. That leaves us with the trio of true Batman film women: Lee Meriwether (Batman), Michelle Pfeiffer (Batman Returns), and the newbie, Anne Hathaway (The Dark Knight Rises).

KILL: Lee Meriwether

You might be thinking "kill that?" Well, by default. Or if you need another excuse, because the Adam West Batman film is so bad that it drags her down through proximity. Remember that scene where Batman runs with the bomb for like 20 fucking minutes and keeps running into parades and sailboats and shit? *shudder* I'm sure if I had been a teenager around this time (or...you know...alive at all) I would have a soft spot for Meriwether, but alas, by the time I got around to things, 20 years had gone by since then. Still, give me a time machine, I wouldn't turn her down ;)

FUCK: Michelle Pfeiffer

No, she's not winning for this disheveled, crazy look. She's winning for this disheveled, crazy look. I actually think Meriwether has a prettier face, but damn, Pfeiffer was sexy in Batman Returns. She had that whole "psycho chick that will fuck your brains out to the point where YOU want to stop...then maybe call the police" vibe going on. It's not really my kind of thing, but still, you've got to give some credit to that scene where Batman hits her and she seems to like it. Mrowr indeed.

MARRY: Anne Hathaway

Take a look at her picture. Got the attractiveness? Damn right. And if you aren't convinced, watch Love and Other Drugs. She manages to not only be sexy as hell in the film, but also very cute on top of it, solidifying the marry vote.

2011 Oscars / 83rd Academy Awards Results & Predictions

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:36:00 +0000

Every year, I like to do my best to predict the winners of the Academy Awards. The following are the nominees, my predictions, and eventually the results as well as my review on the results.

BEST PICTURE
NOMINEES: Black Swan, The Fighter, Inception, The Kids are All Right, The King’s Speech, 127 Hours, The Social Network, Toy Story 3, True Grit, Winter’s Bone

PREDICTION: I'm guilty of having not seen True Grit or Winter's Bone, but I've seen the rest and this year, I'm not impressed. Inception, I loved, and I want desperately for it to win, but I know it won't. Toy Story 3, I thought was very good, but it naturally won't win either. The rest of the films, albeit okay, weren't amazing. 127 Hours was a huge let down and really on the verge of bad in my mind. The Fighter, generic. Black Swan, seen it before. Kids, not bad, but I just don't think it has a big enough splash about it to win.Thus I have to go with The King's Speech and The Social Network as the two threats here. Since TSN is a modern story focusing around college kids, I think the older crowd will vote for TKS, because it fits that mold of "serious drama about history" that the Academy loves. Network might have won the Golden Globe, but history itself has shown that that isn't a given to translate to the Oscar. My prediction, The King's Speech wins this year.

RESULT: The King’s Speech

BEST ACTOR
NOMINEES: Javier Bardem (Biutiful), Jeff Bridges (True Grit), Jesse Eisenberg (The Social Network), Colin Firth (The King's Speech), James Franco (127 Hours)

PREDICTION: I haven't seen Biutiful, but Bardem won previously for Supporting. I haven't seen True Grit, but Bridges previously won. Eisenberg, I can't see winning this year. Franco is a good actor, but he doesn't deserve it, because frankly, 127 Hours was a bunch of nonsense and yes, I'll say it, EASY work. Franco's character wasn't some really complex, intricate role that he nailed. Thus, above and beyond, Colin Firth has to win here, just like he did at the Golden Globes.

RESULT: Colin Firth

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
NOMINEES: Christian Bale (The Fighter), John Hawkes (Winter's Bone), Jeremy Renner (The Town), Mark Ruffalo (The Kids are All Right), Geoffrey Rush (The King's Speech)

PREDICTION: Christian Bale will win this. Nuff said.

RESULT: Christian Bale

BEST ACTRESS
NOMINEES: Annette Bening (The Kids are All Right), Nicole Kidman (Rabbit Hole), Jennifer Lawrence (Winter's Bone), Natalie Portman (Black Swan), Michelle Williams (Blue Valentine)

PREDICTION: It pains me to say it, but Natalie Portman doesn't deserve it. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of her. I think she's an underrated actress and, from a guy's perspective, I rank her #2 on my list of celebrity crushes. However, I need to remain unbiased and fair in my predictions, and frankly, I've seen her performance before. This type of role has been done in the past by others, and in more inventive ways. Maybe the script didn't give her much and she couldn't bring out anything extra on her own, I don't know, but I feel this isn't a "best actress" Oscar-worthy performance and that instead, it'll be the role that she should get snubbed on, and then she can take that frustration and pump something better out and win with that. This year, Annette Bening has it locked I think. She won the Golden Globe and she's the right age to win an Oscar. On top of that, she plays a kind of risque role and totally nails it.

RESULT: Natalie Portman

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
NOMINEES: Amy Adams (The Fighter), Helena Bonham Carter (The King's Speech), Melissa Leo (The Fighter), Hailee Steinfeld (True Grit), Jacki Weaver (Animal Kingdom)

PREDICTION: Carter's role in Speech was easy and should be ignored, I think. Adams didn't quite do it for me. I haven't seen Grit or Kingdom, but I definitely have to go with Melissa Leo here. Her character in the Fighter annoyed me so fucking much that I was hoping Wahlberg would deck her. She deserves the award for this.

RESULT: Melissa Leo

BEST ANIMATED FILM
NOMINEES: How to Train Your Dragon, The Illusionist, Toy Story 3

PREDICTION: Come on. Toy Story 3 is winning this. I would bet my entire fortune of several hundred dollars on it.

RESULT: Toy Story 3

BEST ART DIRECTION
NOMINEES: Alice in Wonderland, Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows Part 1, Inception, The King's Speech, True Grit

PREDICTION: Art Direction is an impossible award to predict every year. They have different qualifications all the time and it seems like it's a bipolar choice. Sometimes, they go sci-fi, sometimes they blow a load over historical detail. My guess, and I'm probably going to be wrong no matter what, is that Alice in Wonderland wins, but I wouldn't be the SLIGHTEST bit surprised if The King's Speech won.

RESULT: Alice in Wonderland

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
NOMINEES: Black Swan, Inception, The King's Speech, The Social Network, True Grit

PREDICTION: They damn well better give this to Inception, but they probably won't. If they don't, they'll give it to Black Swan, but I still hope Inception wins this.

RESULT: Inception

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
NOMINEES: Alice in Wonderland, I Am Love, The King's Speech, The Tempest, True Grit

PREDICTION: The King's Speech, I guess. Maybe True Grit. I don't know. Yeah, I guess The King's Speech.

RESULT: Alice in Wonderland

BEST DIRECTOR
NOMINEES: Darren Aronofsky (Black Swan), David O'Russell (The Fighter), Tom Hooper (The King's Speech), David Fincher (The Social Network), Coen Brothers (True Grit)

PREDICTION: What's one of the themes that seems to go on with the Academy Awards lately? Christopher Nolan getting fucked over. What did he do to have them snub him like this again? Absolutely ridiculous. If I were him, I'd be so pissed. I'm also surprised that they aren't gushing over Danny Boyle like they did with the other categories. My guess is Aronofsky wins this as he's had more focus on his film than the others have had on their respective movies. I've never heard of the King's Speech referred to as "Tom Hooper's film", but I always hear Black Swan tied with Aronofsky. Thus, my prediction is Darren Aronofsky winning this award.

RESULT: Tom Hooper

BEST DOCUMENTARY
NOMINEES: Exit through the Gift Shop, Gasland, Inside Job, Restrepo, Waste Land

PREDICTION: I have no idea. I haven't seen any of them, I know nothing about them...not even going to guess.

RESULT: Inside Job

BEST DOCUMENTARY (SHORT)
NOMINEES: Killing in the Name, Poster Girl, Strangers No More, Sun Come Up, The Warriors of Qiugang

PREDICTION: I have no idea. I haven't seen any of them, I know nothing about them...not even going to guess.

RESULT: Strangers No More

BEST FILM EDITING
NOMINEES: Black Swan, The Fighter, The King's Speech, 127 Hours, The Social Network

PREDICTION: Black Swan should win this. Nothing primarily special about the others.

RESULT: The Social Network

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
NOMINEES: Biutiful, Dogtooth, In a Better World, Incendies, Outside the Law

PREDICTION: I have no idea. I guess Biutiful.

RESULT: In a Better World

BEST MAKEUP
NOMINEES: Barney's Version, The Way Back, The Wolfman

PREDICTION: I don't have a ton of faith in my choice here, but I'll say Barney's Version.

RESULT: The Wolfman

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
NOMINEES: How to Train Your Dragon, Inception, The King's Speech, 127 Hours, The Social Network

PREDICTION: I haven't seen Dragon, but while watching the others, the only score that made me notice it was Inception. I'm hearing a lot of good stuff about The Social Network, so that will probably win, and 127 Hours definitely doesn't deserve it as most of the film was just accompanied with mainstream music.

RESULT: The Social Network

BEST ORIGINAL SONG
NOMINEES: "Coming Home" (Country Strong), "I See the Light" (Tangled), "If I Rise" (127 Hours), "We Belong Together" (Toy Story 3)

PREDICTION: Hm....man, this is tough. Total guess, but I'll say "I See the Light".

RESULT: "We Belong Together"

BEST ANIMATED SHORT
NOMINEES: Day & Night, The Gruffalo, Let's Pollute, The Lost Thing, Madagascar, carnet de voyage

PREDICTION: I have no idea. I haven't seen any of them, I know nothing about them...not even going to guess.

RESULT: The Lost Thing

BEST SHORT FILM
NOMINEES: The Confession, The Crush, God of Love, Na Wewe, Wish 143

PREDICTION: I have no idea. I haven't seen any of them, I know nothing about them...not even going to guess.

RESULT: God of Love

BEST SOUND EDITING
NOMINEES: Inception, Toy Story 3, Tron: Legacy, True Grit, Unstoppable

PREDICTION: Inception is getting screwed over so much this year, they'll probably give them this award and try to act like that's compensation. The others don't make much sense to me. Inception better win this at least.

RESULT: Inception

BEST SOUND MIXING
NOMINEES: Inception, The King's Speech, Salt, The Social Network, True Grit

PREDICTION: It amazes me how they can nominate something for Sound Editing, but not Sound Mixing. It always seemed to me like they should just be the same award, but I'm sure that for someone more educated in the subject than myself, there's probably a glaring difference I'm unaware of. Still...I'm going with Inception.

RESULT: Inception

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
NOMINEES: Alice in Wonderland, Harry Potter & the Deathly Hollows Part 1, Hereafter, Inception, Iron Man 2

PREDICTION: Ridiculous that both Scott Pilgrim and Tron didn’t get nominated but Hereafter did. They’re nominating that because of ONE scene, and that film sucked balls. Iron Man 2 doesn’t deserve a nomination either. My guess is they give this to Alice in Wonderland.

RESULT: Inception

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
NOMINEES: 127 Hours, The Social Network, Toy Story 3, True Grit, Winter’s Bone

PREDICTION: I'll be seriously pissed if 127 Hours wins this as this screenplay was so incredibly simple that it seems like they could've knocked it out in under an hour. I can't see them giving it to Toy Story 3. I'm astounded by how much True Grit is nominated considering it's a remake of a western and looks like it sucks to me. Winter's Bone I know nothing about, so I'm guessing The Social Network wins here.

RESULT: The Social Network

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
NOMINEES: Another Year, The Fighter, Inception, The Kids are All Right, The King’s Speech

PREDICTION: The Fighter shouldn't win this. I'm guessing they'll give it to The Kids are All Right, but I don't know. That would be my best guess and the more I think about it, the more confident I am in it, but it could all depend on whether or not they're in one of those moods where they give everything to a small number of films, or they spread out the awards to try to give everything some recognition. If The Social Network wins Adapted but not Best Picture, then Kids will win this I think.

RESULT: King's Speech

THOUGHTS: They pulled some shockers on me that I totally didn't see coming. For instance, I was TOTALLY sold on Portman not winning Best Actress. I just felt like there was no chance, yet, here I am, eating my words. A few awards, I felt were really obvious choices, so they wouldn't pick them, and I ended up psyching myself out by doing that (ie, Inception winning visual effects). So what's my score? Well, I was kicking ass the first half of the show and thought I was on my way to a perfect game, but the end result, out of 20 guesses, I got 11 right. I just beat the spread :)

Ten Reasons I Hate Twitter

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 05:45:00 +0000

As much as I have stated before that I have my problems with Facebook (detailed here) there is a bigger enemy in the social networking world: TWITTER.

1) Hash tags
Supposedly, hash tags are set up so you can search for something. Ok...then why do I also have a search bar? If you hash something like, I don't know, #eggs, I can still search for "eggs" and get similar results. The only difference is that I didn't get solely people that decided to hash it. (Side note: did anyone else just realize the whole hash brown and egg thing going on here that was completely unintentional?). But the thing that annoys me the most about hash tags is that it promotes horrible grammar. An idea like "you're the best" is always typed out as #yourthebest. The English professor in me fucking HATES that beyond insanity.

2) Trending topics
Don't get me wrong, it makes perfect sense to have trending topics. The concept itself isn't necessarily flawed, nor are some of the topics that trend. If someone just won the Super Bowl, I'd expect them to be trending, for instance. But how often are trending topics just stupid bullshit, like an old TV show rerunning, or 8 variants of the same thing? You don't need "Jersey Shore", "Snookie", "Situation", "Situation Shore", "Jersey Shore Snookie", and "Jwoww Jersey Shore" all trending at once. Actually, you don't need those particular things trending at all.

Note: The trending topics at the time of this post included "Pee Wee Herman", "Andy Samberg", "Weekend Update", "RIP Justin Bieber", and "Jason Born" - there are only 2 topics there, Bieber and SNL, yet they're represented 5 times.

3) Follow the leader
Twitter exhibits how so many people just latch onto the popular thing. If a TV show is trending, like spoken about above, then everyone feels the need to talk about it. Oh, Family Matters is trending? Time for me to post a tweet about how "I love Family Matters #familymatters".

4) Justin Bieber
The presence of this kid has turned Twitter into a Bieber fan board. I don't personally hate the kid as much as everyone else, but I don't find his music entertaining, I don't find his celebrity status to make much sense, and I DO find his fans to be incredibly annoying in Twilight fashion. I try not to associate with Bieber fans for this reason, yet as much as I try to avoid them, Twitter is a place I can always run into a dozen or so with ease.

5) Retweeting
The Facebook "like" system works much better in my mind as it shows that you support a concept. Maybe it's just me, but retweeting seems like you're stealing the person's idea and trying to pass it off as your own, and I've never been a fan of that.

6) Words of Little Value
How often do you read something on Twitter and it actually enlightens you in a way? Keep thinking, I'll still be here. Thought of something yet? Yeah, me neither. Damn near everything spoken on Twitter is absolutely pointless. I do not give a shit if you've just eaten a sandwich. I do not give a shit if you are heading out to go to work. I doubt anybody else does, either. Celebrities can get away with this as our culture is fucking FASCINATED with celebrity-life, but if you aren't famous, you shouldn't be tweeting about the most mundane nonsense. OMG, you just had another cup of coffee? You just had one 2 minutes ago! ROFL! Please let me know when you've had another, random person on the internet that I don't know!

7) Twitpic Overuse
Twitpic, yfrog, and all the others are a perfectly acceptable program if used correctly, but there are people that post way too much. They take those pointless tweets and instead, replace them with pointless pictures. Pictures are worth a thousand words, but not if it's just a picture of a ceiling or the gas station you're at today or something.

8) Groveling for a Reply
This is obviously more prevalent in fans of celebrities. Here's how it works when it's ok: a celebrity tweets a question to his or her fans, they respond, and the celebrity responds in turn. WWE superstar Goldust is someone that does this well. I have nothing against that at all, and in fact, I encourage it, as I'm always supportive of celebrities having a better personal connection with their fan base. It humanizes them and keeps them off their high horses. But the problem comes when people start replying to things that aren't even questions, hoping desperately that the celebrity will tweet them back, just so they can see the little "@theirusername" listed on their account. Take a look at how many replies someone of fame gets if they even post something like "I'm so tired". The celeb isn't going to see that you responded to them, hop on a private jet, fly to your house, and become your best friend. Most of these people that will reply-tweet multiple times to the same celebrity and cross their fingers will then go apeshit if they actually respond and you can guarantee that their next tweet is "OMG [insert celeb] just replied to me! Squeee!!!"

9) Spam
Good fucking lord, why are there so many posts about whitening your teeth?

10) Fail Whale
"Twitter is over capacity". We've all seen it. Twitter experiences problems all the time...so often that they shouldn't even use that dumbass bird up above as the mascot, they should use the fail whale. But that right there says a lot - that despite the reasons up above, Twitter is still so popular that the site can't handle it.

If the whale is a sign of failure, why does it look peaceful and happy?

That being said, do I use Twitter? Yeah. I have five accounts (primary one is @ToeKneeManGo for those that want to follow). Kind of hypocritical for me to tear it down and talk about how there are too many people using it despite the flaws if I'm a user as well, right? I'll admit it, but at the same time, I use it for marketing purposes, so it has always been more of a chore than a pleasure. In today's social networking world, you can accomplish more through something like Twitter than what you used to do handing out pamphlets and making posters to hang up around town. You'll likely never see me have a huge presence on Twitter because I can only find the power to check it maybe twice a day and most of my tweets come from the RSS feed of my Facebook status updates. The site is just way too fucking annoying.

Top News of 2010

noreply@blogger.com (Anthony Mango) — Fri, 31 Dec 2010 19:41:00 +0000

Now that we're looking at the year 2011 coming up in a matter of mere hours, I decided instead of pointing out once more that New Year's resolutions are a waste of time, I'd try to look back and figure out what I'd consider the biggest news story of 2010.

When I skimmed other lists people had created and tried my best to remember what had happened on my own, I came across a lot of different answers.

First, for some reason, people think that championship wins are amongst the top news. Really? Someone wins the Super Bowl every year. Is that really a surprise? I understand that when it comes to "what news stories had the most presence on the media", the winner of the World Series would be something that every station would report on. The World Cup was big, but still, not important enough in my mind. However, that's not something that is worth declaring at the top in my mind.

Nor is it when a celebrity does something scandalous, unless it is fucking MAJOR. Michael Jackson's death (albeit not necessarily 'scandalous') was absolutely huge and I could see picking that for 2009...but that wasn't this year. This year we had Tiger Woods, Rahm Emanuel, so on and so forth. We also had people talk about Lindsay Lohan as if she was the most important person in the world. Blech.

It came down to really only two stories, after all my hunting. The one that didn't make it was the WikiLeaks...situation. I'm not exactly sure what to call it, as "terrorist activity" is stupid in my mind, but if I officially call it "government pissed that someone isn't letting them get away with bullshit so they try to get him to stop", then I'll probably find myself accused of fraudulent rape (excuse me, "sex by surprise") charges ;) The reason I decided I just couldn't choose this as "THE news story of 2010" was because it's still going on and it just happened recently enough that the consequences haven't fully played out yet, nor does everyone know what you're talking about when you reference it.

Thus, this year's winner has to go to the umbrella classification of "NATURAL DISASTERS". The Haiti and Chile earthquakes? Hurricane Earl? Shit, you can just go through the list on Wikipedia and look at them all. The top of all, though, has GOT to be the BP oil spill. Now, I didn't write an article about it at the time, because it seemed like it was being blown out of proportion that day. Little did I know that this thing would go on for weeks and weeks and be one of the hot-button issues for the year in terms of everything from environmentalism, the economy, and politics to conspiracy theories on weather control and even the plot for a great trilogy of South Park episodes. This was definitely THE story of the year in my opinion.

I'm curious: what do YOU think was 'the' news story of the year? Leave your comments below.

NOTE: Some other things I decided I should bring attention to:

The Movie of the Year = Inception, without a doubt. I haven't seen The Social Network yet, and that did have a huge presence due to Facebook and Zuckerberg being tied into it, but Inception...c'mon.

The Musician of the Year = Probably Lady Gaga. She was fucking everywhere this year. Either her or Katy Perry.

Shameful Pop Culture Presence of the Year = The whole Jersey Shore thing. Good lord.

Biggest TV Shows of 2010 = Now, I didn't do the research, but I would assume from the buzz I constantly heard about them, it would be one of Lost or Glee. I didn't/don't watch either show, so I can't comment on how good they were/are, but those are the two I heard about 24/7 basically. Dancing with the Stars of course was huge (for some fucking reason), and American Idol surprisingly hasn't died yet. Meanwhile I'll be fine watching the shows I actually find entertaining, like It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, Burn Notice, and How I Met Your Mother.

Any other categories you can think of, send them along and I'll try to add them up above.

Incidentally, I'd like to wish all the good people in the world a happy new year. The way things are nowadays, I think we could all use a pep in our step, so I hope 2011 is one we'll look back in with a smile.