Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Things I want to hear from the designer of my car...
From Sebastian Blanco at AutoblogGreen:
I am in full agreement with Arnell about the necessity of a vehicle designed on the basis of those three elements, and applaud Peapod Mobility for having the courage to stand up for what's right and do the job themselves. Looking at the final product, though, I can't help but feel like the moon helmet reflection element and the Darth Vader element were a little too fully integrated into the turtle vision. It just looks so damn happy, sittin' there like a bump on a log collecting sunshine in anticipation of a nice refreshing swim.
For those who want less happy turtle and more Star Wars, it seems to me that the only choice is Pugeot's new Capsule concept:
Peugeot's design perfectly captures AT-ST, while also incorporating a hint of wasp. But the happy turtle is gone. And so I wonder: can't we have something in between? I'll let you know if I find it...
Peter Arnell, the chief innovation officer at Peapod Mobility, took us on a quick descriptive tour of the Peapod and said that the design was influenced by three things. Ready for the list? The reflection in Buzz Aldrin's helmet when he stepped onto the moon, a turtle and Darth Vader. Yeah, that's what we thought, too.
I am in full agreement with Arnell about the necessity of a vehicle designed on the basis of those three elements, and applaud Peapod Mobility for having the courage to stand up for what's right and do the job themselves. Looking at the final product, though, I can't help but feel like the moon helmet reflection element and the Darth Vader element were a little too fully integrated into the turtle vision. It just looks so damn happy, sittin' there like a bump on a log collecting sunshine in anticipation of a nice refreshing swim.
For those who want less happy turtle and more Star Wars, it seems to me that the only choice is Pugeot's new Capsule concept:
Peugeot's design perfectly captures AT-ST, while also incorporating a hint of wasp. But the happy turtle is gone. And so I wonder: can't we have something in between? I'll let you know if I find it...
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
.....in which Sarah dares you not to laugh. Because she did....a lot.
This one was a laugh-out-loud-at-work kinda deal:
....and this one was an I-laughed-so-hard-I-almost-peed-my-pants-at-my-computer kinda deal.
....and this one was an I-laughed-so-hard-I-almost-peed-my-pants-at-my-computer kinda deal.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Polar bears are NOT prey in Germany
Okay, some of you may remember a picture I posted of a polar bear being trapped viciously by a Korean. This may be backlash that we're seeing to that incident, or this may be an isolated attack. I'm not sure. I'm not a polar bearologist; I'm not any other kind of bearologist either. I'm just reporting the facts.
Fact #1:
A woman in Germany visited the Berlin Zoo. This isn't groundbreaking, but it's necessary to acknowledge that she was, in fact, at the zoo.
Fact #2:
The woman visited the polar bear cage at the Berlin Zoo. Yes, if I went to the Berlin Zoo, you might also try to find me at the polar bear cage. Again, it's important to establish our facts.
Fact #3:
Said woman has the innate ability to get over fences which separate humans and polar bears.
Fact #4:
Said woman actually utilized her innate ability at the Berlin Zoo. She jumped over the fence so she could get in the polar bear cage. Why? Maybe she wanted to hangout. Maybe she wanted a coke. Unfortunately, the bears were FRESH OUT OF COLA.
Fact #5:
The woman can swim. Take a look here as she swims around in the polar bears' little pond.
Fact #6:
The woman made eye contact with a polar bear in his/her territory. Yeah, nice job, lady. Know your role.
Fact #7:
The woman is not equipped with polar bear proof skin. That's right. She actually invaded Polar Bear Berlin Zoo Country (PBBZC) without any of the necessary equipment for a proper invasion. Well, PBBZC isn't gonna take any of your shit, Ms. Crazy.
Fact #8:
The woman was rescued after a few bites. Lucky for her, the PBBZC isn't a very efficient killing machine. Damn polar bears.
Fact #1:
A woman in Germany visited the Berlin Zoo. This isn't groundbreaking, but it's necessary to acknowledge that she was, in fact, at the zoo.
Fact #2:
The woman visited the polar bear cage at the Berlin Zoo. Yes, if I went to the Berlin Zoo, you might also try to find me at the polar bear cage. Again, it's important to establish our facts.
Fact #3:
Said woman has the innate ability to get over fences which separate humans and polar bears.
Fact #4:
Said woman actually utilized her innate ability at the Berlin Zoo. She jumped over the fence so she could get in the polar bear cage. Why? Maybe she wanted to hangout. Maybe she wanted a coke. Unfortunately, the bears were FRESH OUT OF COLA.
Fact #5:
The woman can swim. Take a look here as she swims around in the polar bears' little pond.
Fact #6:
The woman made eye contact with a polar bear in his/her territory. Yeah, nice job, lady. Know your role.
Fact #7:
The woman is not equipped with polar bear proof skin. That's right. She actually invaded Polar Bear Berlin Zoo Country (PBBZC) without any of the necessary equipment for a proper invasion. Well, PBBZC isn't gonna take any of your shit, Ms. Crazy.
Fact #8:
The woman was rescued after a few bites. Lucky for her, the PBBZC isn't a very efficient killing machine. Damn polar bears.
Everyone's a little on edge...
John recently posted a story about a possible zombie incident in New Orleans, and it seems like fear is slowly beginning to take hold. On Wednesday night, Woody Harrelson was involved in an altercation with a cameraman at a New York airport resulting from a case of mistaken identity. Harrelson explains:
A quick search turned up a rather muddled video of the incident, obviously beginning after the "zombie identification" took place. It's not clear to me whether the cameraman drew Harrelson into the incident by groaning, walking stiffly, and feigning a hunger for human flesh. But judging by the fact that no one seemed to step in and protect the cameraman, I would venture to guess that everyone else thought he was a zombie too.
As a general zombie-related panic spreads through the population, I think it's only safe to say that we might end up seeing many more unfortunate incidents like this one. A potentially worrying possibility is that people will begin to use the "zombie defense" in situations where they really didn't think that their victim was a zombie, and just wanted to attack them for other reasons.
I wrapped a movie called 'Zombieland,' in which I was constantly under assault by zombies, then flew to New York, still very much in character. With my daughter at the airport I was startled by a paparazzo, who I quite understandably mistook for a zombie.
A quick search turned up a rather muddled video of the incident, obviously beginning after the "zombie identification" took place. It's not clear to me whether the cameraman drew Harrelson into the incident by groaning, walking stiffly, and feigning a hunger for human flesh. But judging by the fact that no one seemed to step in and protect the cameraman, I would venture to guess that everyone else thought he was a zombie too.
As a general zombie-related panic spreads through the population, I think it's only safe to say that we might end up seeing many more unfortunate incidents like this one. A potentially worrying possibility is that people will begin to use the "zombie defense" in situations where they really didn't think that their victim was a zombie, and just wanted to attack them for other reasons.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
C Me Dance is my new favorite thing
Every once in a while, the internet will alert me to something so hilarious that I have no choice but to find out everything about it. This is one of those times. And now I will share it all with you.
It all started when I was alerted to the following movie trailer:
Predictably, I had to know more. First of all, well...what the f***? Who would do this? The answer was Uplifting Entertainment.
As you might imagine, I was really glad to hear that finally someone was producing Christian entertainment that can compete with the most popular entertainment out there. Finally someone's striking back against the other terrible entertainment out there, which is obviously made by Jews.
So, then, it seemed like the appropriate thing to do was to find out how well this movie actually competed. The first review I found was a rather obvious attempt to smear the film, written by (blatant Jew) Gary Goldstein of the LA Times. He calls the film "ham-fisted" and "rudimentarily written, acted, and directed," and basically suggests that there isn't much about the movie that would make it worth seeing. But then he leaves us with a diabolical cliff hanger:
DAMMIT GOLDSTEIN! Now I have to know what happens! Bah!
But as bad as Goldstein's review was, it didn't prepare me for the next critical opinion -- this one from Ken Hanke of the Mountain Express. Hanke isn't clearly a Jew, but there are some immediate clues as to why he might be expected to come down harshly on the film, captured in this comment:
A porn-lover, eh? Figures. So I take it with a grain of salt when Hanke (whose name sounds like what he probably masturbates into while watching his smut films) one-ups Goldstein with the following:
Jeez; Goldstein said it was rudimentary, but less-than-rudimentary? That's cold. But what's hot is this observation:
Nice catch, pervert.
Critic Brian Orndorf almost has something nicer to say, in the sense that he entertains the idea that people should see the movie. He writes:
At least he considers it! But where Orndorf sees flaws, I see unqualified virtues. For example:
Sounds like someone just wants to continue living a life filled with inappropriate films, porn, crime, and rape! I don't know about you, Orndorf, but around here we like it when those things go away because of Jesus powers.
But if the Jew and the two filth-peddlers weren't enough to convince you that the sinful, Jew-dominated media is out to get this move, Luke Thomson's review in LA Weekly might make up your mind for you. I've decided that it would be best to simply reproduce it in full below (LA Weekly people can ask me to take it down if they mind):
I think it should be clear that we're not going to get an honest opinion from the critical community. So where can we go for a more truthful (that is, more positive) take? One word: Fandango. From user "myheaven06":
From "Standupforyourbeliefs":
"Sherrielynn1":
I could go on, but you get the point. This movie brings it hard, and critics need to get a life.
I leave you with this -- an alternate ending to the movie's trailer that seems to clearly call for a sequel:
It all started when I was alerted to the following movie trailer:
Predictably, I had to know more. First of all, well...what the f***? Who would do this? The answer was Uplifting Entertainment.
We strive daily to provide wholesome Christian and Family-Oriented entertainment. We create products which compete with the most popular TV programs, films, music, games and other forms of entertainment in the marketplace. We serve God and contribute to healthier, happier families. Each day Uplifting Entertainment delivers entertainment to the world that will inform with delight -- the way God intended it.
As you might imagine, I was really glad to hear that finally someone was producing Christian entertainment that can compete with the most popular entertainment out there. Finally someone's striking back against the other terrible entertainment out there, which is obviously made by Jews.
So, then, it seemed like the appropriate thing to do was to find out how well this movie actually competed. The first review I found was a rather obvious attempt to smear the film, written by (blatant Jew) Gary Goldstein of the LA Times. He calls the film "ham-fisted" and "rudimentarily written, acted, and directed," and basically suggests that there isn't much about the movie that would make it worth seeing. But then he leaves us with a diabolical cliff hanger:
For the record, the text message-like title actually refers to the license plate Sheri plans to get if she lives long enough to drive. Two guesses how that one turns out.
DAMMIT GOLDSTEIN! Now I have to know what happens! Bah!
But as bad as Goldstein's review was, it didn't prepare me for the next critical opinion -- this one from Ken Hanke of the Mountain Express. Hanke isn't clearly a Jew, but there are some immediate clues as to why he might be expected to come down harshly on the film, captured in this comment:
It is simply not possible to convey the sheer ineptitude of C Me Dance. Ironically, the look of the film often verges on porn (co-critic Justin Souther even remarked at one point, "This is just a pizza-delivery guy shy of a porn"), which I doubt was the intent.
A porn-lover, eh? Figures. So I take it with a grain of salt when Hanke (whose name sounds like what he probably masturbates into while watching his smut films) one-ups Goldstein with the following:
Even by the none-too-high standards of this kind of movie, C Me Dance is notable for its muddled plot, its abominable acting, its atrocious dialogue, its less-than-rudimentary-filmmaking technique, its threadbare production values and its smug self-righteousness.
Jeez; Goldstein said it was rudimentary, but less-than-rudimentary? That's cold. But what's hot is this observation:
That Jesus' hand is played by the same guy who is Satan's stunt double surely qualifies as blasphemy of some sort.
Nice catch, pervert.
Critic Brian Orndorf almost has something nicer to say, in the sense that he entertains the idea that people should see the movie. He writes:
The list of cinematic offenses is lengthy with "C Me Dance," which is so relentlessly dreadful it almost needs to be seen to be believed. However, that would require 85 minutes of your time that I cannot recommend be wasted on something as ludicrous and shamefully unprofessional as this movie.
At least he considers it! But where Orndorf sees flaws, I see unqualified virtues. For example:
...Sheri’s powers are laughable, managing to lower crime and rape statistics instantly with her message of Jesus, not to mention persuading Hollywood to stop releasing films with inappropriate values. Oh, and she’s able to halt the distribution of pornography. Damn you, Sheri!
Sounds like someone just wants to continue living a life filled with inappropriate films, porn, crime, and rape! I don't know about you, Orndorf, but around here we like it when those things go away because of Jesus powers.
But if the Jew and the two filth-peddlers weren't enough to convince you that the sinful, Jew-dominated media is out to get this move, Luke Thomson's review in LA Weekly might make up your mind for you. I've decided that it would be best to simply reproduce it in full below (LA Weekly people can ask me to take it down if they mind):
Faith-based films have made great strides in the past decade or so, from mainstream stars like Mel Gibson and Kirk Cameron giving passion projects a boost to evangelicals like Matthew Crouch becoming more savvy about the ins and outs of studio production. And yet, if any movie could undo all that progress in one fell swoop, it’s C Me Dance, an overwrought piece of (apparently) unintentional camp that, if it is remembered at all, will be only because some low-brow cinephile chooses to place it on a drunken rep-house double-bill with Tommy Wiseau’s The Room. Written, produced, directed by and starring “veteran” Greg Robbins (Pastor Greg), who has fewer movies on his IMDB profile than I do and whose filmmaking career seems to stretch back all of four years, C Me Dance plays like a fake Christian movie Troy McClure might end up starring in on an episode of The Simpsons, though it’s apparently for real. When high school ballerina Sheri (Christina DeMarco) is diagnosed with the world’s most flattering case of leukemia (no chemo or wasting away for this cancer girl!), her devastation quickly subsides as the power of the Lord descends, giving Sheri the ability to communicate telepathically, and in turn causing anybody she touches to hallucinate an image of the nails driven into Christs hands. This naturally angers Satan (Peter Kent), who appears as a paunchy guy in a trenchcoat, who sometimes forgets to put his monster-eye contacts in. But Sheri and her dad (Robbins) cleverly counter the Devil ... by evangelizing on TV! Had Trinity Broadcasting Network come up with this feature in 1980, it would have been easier to sympathize with its flaws. In 2009, its hilarious ineptitude makes it border on becoming a cult classic for the ages ... and we’re not talking religious cult.
I think it should be clear that we're not going to get an honest opinion from the critical community. So where can we go for a more truthful (that is, more positive) take? One word: Fandango. From user "myheaven06":
I saw this film this weekend, and was blown away. It has been such a long time since I walked out of a movie being moved that deeply.
From "Standupforyourbeliefs":
I seen this movie today and it is a Great Movie - obviously the people who do not like it probably do not know God or they are living in a vacuum and do not want to beleive what is going on around them. Most of you "so called critics" probably have not even seen the movie and it probably makes you feel important to attempt to drag someone/something down! It is time that the Christians of America stand up for their beleifs and stop letting everyone take away what we beleive...It is obvious that our Youth is in "serious" trouble and need help it is time that we all wake up and admit it!!!
"Sherrielynn1":
We just got back from watching C ME DANCE and then we googled the movie and found critics reviews. You people are HIGH!!! This movie was powerful and wonderful, my friends and I agree this was an amazing story and we never saw these actors before but they BLEW us away. The father and daughter relationship was very strong and Greg Robins is one of the best actors I have ever seen. He totally sucked us in and we are telling everyone we know to experience c me dance
You people that don't
get this movie need to get with GOD!
I could go on, but you get the point. This movie brings it hard, and critics need to get a life.
I leave you with this -- an alternate ending to the movie's trailer that seems to clearly call for a sequel:
Oh, to be an American
The zombie war has begun...
and its birthplace is NEW ORLEANS, USA:
Start stockpiling and start thinking about defensible positions close by. We'll need to avoid the cities, obviously. We first need to find a reasonable location, preferably on top of a hill. I would also recommend being within running distance of a river so we can have available evacuation should the need arise. We need munitions and medical supplies. For food, I would recommend something that has no expiration date and offers reasonable nutritional value. I might recommend Twinkies as a primary food source, in honor of the classic Simpsons episode. We may also want entertainment. We should grab some PS3s for rocking out. We can play Resident Evil 5 for practice in the thorough and effective elimination of zombies. On zombie-lite days (Yes, I'm developing a new dictionary for us to use which will incorporate new and necessary vocabulary), we can drink mimosas on the front lawn. Deal?
Start stockpiling and start thinking about defensible positions close by. We'll need to avoid the cities, obviously. We first need to find a reasonable location, preferably on top of a hill. I would also recommend being within running distance of a river so we can have available evacuation should the need arise. We need munitions and medical supplies. For food, I would recommend something that has no expiration date and offers reasonable nutritional value. I might recommend Twinkies as a primary food source, in honor of the classic Simpsons episode. We may also want entertainment. We should grab some PS3s for rocking out. We can play Resident Evil 5 for practice in the thorough and effective elimination of zombies. On zombie-lite days (Yes, I'm developing a new dictionary for us to use which will incorporate new and necessary vocabulary), we can drink mimosas on the front lawn. Deal?
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Danny, you have been deemed a
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)